


; i>- 



UNTI'ED STATES OF AMERICA. 



LETTERS 



THE REV. JOHN SMITH, 



A PRESBYTERIAN MINISTER, 



TO HIS BROTHER, 



THE REV. PETER SMITH. 



A METHODIST PREACHER. 




PHILADELPHIA: 

J. B. LIPPINCOTT & CO. 
1862. 



^ 



3 



34- 



f?i» 



Entered, according to Act of Congress, in the year 1862, by 

J. B. LIPPINCOTT & CO., 

In the Clerk's Office of the District Court of the United States for the 

Eastern District of Pennsylvania. 



2 % i & & 



CONTENTS. 



PAGE 

Letter 1 5 

Letter II 8 

Letter III 11 

Letter IV 16 

Letter V 19 

Letter YI 25 

Letter VII 32 

Letter VIII 34 

Letter IX 42 

Letter X . 47 

Letter XI , ... 55 

LetterXII 61 

Letter XIII 68 

Letter XIV 71 

Letter XV 78 

Letter XVI 84 

Letter XVII 87 

Letter XVIII 89 

Letter XIX 97 



IV CONTENTS. 

PAGE 

Letter XX 103 

Letter XXI 110 

Letter XXII.. 117 

Letter XXIII 124 

Letter XXIV 131 

Letter XXV 136 

Letter XXVI 141 

Letter XXVII 146 

Letter XXVIII 149 

Letter XXIX 153 

Letter XXX 158 

Letter XXXI 164 

Letter XXXII 172 

Letter XXXIII 176 

Letter XXXIV 184 



LETTERS 



JOHN SMITH TO PETER SMITH, 



LETTER I. 

introduction. 

Dear Brother : — 

It is my purpose to write for the press a 
series of plain letters addressed to you, of which 
this is the first. You are an Arminian, I am a 
Calvinist. We cannot both be right ; and as 
one or the other must be in the wrong, you will 
not think it strange that I assume the wrong to 
be on your side. I propose in these letters 
to point out the errors and inconsistencies of 
Arminianism ; but I trust that it is as far be- 
neath my dignity to write in the style of abuse, 
as it could be beneath your dignity to read such 
a style with patience. The great denomination 
2 (5) 



6 INTRODUCTION. 

to which you belong, we Presbyterians rejoice 
to recognize as one of the leading branches of 
the church of Christ, and I, for one, do not find 
it in my heart to treat her with abuse. We 
have between us a common Christianity, in 
whose defense we can stand side by side ; and 
shoulder to shoulder, we can press forward to 
the attack of the common foe. We have a com- 
mon Saviour, who is precious alike to you and 
to us. As we ought not to be objects of fierce 
attack by you, you ought not to be objects of* 
fierce attack by us ; and you certainly shall not 
be by me. 

We cannot, however, both be in the right. 
To us it is quite clear that your church, while 
she holds to the great essentials, ignores some 
important principles of religion. The gospel, 
which you and your brethren preach, is not, in- 
deed, another gospel ; the elements of salvation 
are there, but, as it strikes us, these elements 
are strangely mixed and compounded with hu- 
man devices and human errors. It has always 
seemed to us that the Christian warrior, clad in 
the panoply of Methodist- Arminianism, fights 
at manifest disadvantage. The armor appears 
scant and defective. Pardon me, brother, but 
either we have too much, or you have not 



INTRODUCTION. 7 

enough. The Arminian helmet of salvation 
may do for you, but it would hardly cover our 
defenseless heads. Your shield of faith may be 
sufficient for your purpose, but it is not large 
enough ; its texture is not firm enough to ward 
off all the fiery darts of our adversaries. The 
sword, which you wield, is doubtless the sword 
of the Spirit ; but the edge is too often turned 
and blunted by unfortunate strokes, against 
what you denominate the errors of Calvinism, 
but what are in reality the adamantine truths 
of God's eternal word. To point out these de- 
fects, to set forth the inconsistencies and con- 
tradictions in your system of theology, and to 
lead the reader from the Arminian form of 
Christianity to the purer and more perfect re- 
ligion of the Bible, is the task I propose to my- 
self in the composition of the following letters. 

John Smith. 



IRON AND CLAY. 



LETTER II. 



Dear Brother: — 

The doctrinal system of the Arminian Meth- 
odists often reminds me of the image which 
Nebuchadnezzar, King of Babylon, saw in vis- 
ion. While the head, the arms, the body, and 
the legs were each of solid metal, of gold and 
silver, and brass and iron, the feet and toes had 
this strange peculiarity, they were partly of 
iron and partly of potter's clay. The composi- 
tion of those feet and toes strikes me as a 
capital representation of Arminianism, which 
has at once the iron strength of truth, and the 
crumbling incoherence of error. The great 
fundamental truths of the gospel are there. 
The fall of man, the Divinity of the Lord Jesus 
Christ, His sacrificial offering, the regeneration 
of the sinner by the Holy Spirit, — these are all 
there. But, unfortunately, with every one of 
these great- scriptural truths are mingled errors 
more or less serious ; some of them quite spe- 
cious, others quite absurd. Let me now, my 
brother, point out to you the proportions of 
the iron and the clay of which your theological 



IRON AND CLAY. 9 

system is made up. The standards of the Meth- 
odist Episcopal Church set forth the following 
doctrines : — 

1st. God created man a free agent. 

This is iron. 
2d. Adam lost his free agency in the fall. 

This is clay. 
3d. Through grace free agency was restored 
to Adam. 

Clay. 
4th. Adam was constituted the federal head 
and representative of his posterity. 
Iron. 
5th. The human race were involved in ruin 
by their federal head and representative, so that 
death temporal, spiritual, and eternal seized 
them all. 

Iron. 
6th. The human race could not in justice 
have been thus involved in ruin, had not God 
determined to send His Son into the world to 
counteract the evils of the apostacy. 
Clay. 
fth. After the fall, God, as a just Being, was 
under obligation to do one of two things : either 
to cut off the race at once in the person of 
2* 



10 IRON AND CLAY. 

Adam, or to -provide a Saviour by way of com- 
pensation to the lost family of man. 
Miry clay. 
8th. In the infinitude of His grace, God pro- 
vided a Saviour, the second Adam, the Lord 
from Heaven, to redeem wretched sinners from 
the thraldom of sin and death. 
Solid iron. 
9th. But if God had not sent His Son to re- 
deem the world, the world could never have 
been called to account for transgression. 
Clay. 
10th. Without grace sinners cannot repent 
and turn to God. 
Iron. 
11th. If God did not bestow grace, sinners 
would not be under obligation to repent and 
turn to God. 
Clay. 
12th. God has not the right to pass by any 
sinner of the human race. He has not the 
right to have mercy on whom He will have 
mercy, nor has He the right to harden whom 
He will harden. 

Potter's clay. 
Clay enough, surely ! The feet and toes of 
Nebuchadnezzar's image could hardly have had 



LOSS OF FREE AGENCY. 11 

a greater proportion of it. In the skillful 
hands, however, of your preachers and writers, 
the iron and the clay, gospel truth and human 
error, are so attempered ; the angular projections 
so neatly filed away, the ugly hollows and in- 
dentations so nicely filled up, that the mass 
comes forth a system smooth and rounded ; 
beautiful to look upon, but great care to be 
used in the handling. I propose to try a few 
strokes of the hammer on the several parts of 
this ingeniously constructed system, and should 
the soft clay separate and fly off from the hard 
metal, let the result be attributed rather to the 
unlucky combination of such discordant mate- 
rials, than to the strength or skill of the arm 
that wields the implement. 

John Smith. 



LETTER III. 

Dear Brother : — 

The Arminian scheme, I said, is a mixture 
of truth and error, of gospel truth and human 
'error. Christ Jesus the true Foundation is in- 
deed laid, but on that foundation is reared no 



12 LOSS OF FREE AGENCT, 

small amount of the wood, hay, and stubble of 
men's devices. Among these devices are two 
distinguished by their singularity: one, that 
free agency was lost by sin ; the other, that free 
agency was restored by grace. "We believe," 
say the Doctrinal Tracts, published by order of 
the General Conference, — "we believe," say all 
the preachers, elders, and bishops of the Method- 
ist Episcopal Church, — "we believe that in the 
moment Adam fell he had no freedom of will 
left." But why do you all believe so? Is it 
because the Bible says so ? Will you point to a 
single passage in the Old or New Testament where 
such a statement is made ? Or, if this is asking 
too much, will you at least name some passage 
from which such an inference even can with fair- 
ness be drawn? You know that you cannot. You 
know, my good brother, that we are all free 
agents, and that the sacred oracles set this forth 
in language very distinct and very clear. "Yes, 
we are all free agents," you reply; "but free 
agency was restored by grace. A measure of 
free will, say the Doctrinal Tracts, is supernat- 
urally given to all men, and therefore all men 
are now responsible agents." This is odd 
enough. But where, it may be asked, do the' 
Scriptures teach that fallen man had freedom of 



LOSS OF FREE AGENCY. 13 

will restored to him by grace ? In the same 
book, chapter, and verse, I suppose, where it is 
stated that he lost it ! It would be a curious 
subject of inquiry, how long an interval there 
was between the loss and the restoration of the 
free agency of the first man — between the point 
at which he ceased to be responsible and the 
point where he again was clothed with responsi- 
bility. The Doctrinal Tracts, unfortunately, 
throw no light on this mystery. Let us, how- 
ever, venture to suppose it to have been the 
period that elapsed from the instant of the fall 
to the cool of the evening, when the voice of the 
Lord God walking in the garden was heard 
calling to him, ''Where art thou?" During 
this space of time, then, the father of the human 
race could do no wrong, according to the Ar- 
minian theory, because he had no freedom of 
will left. To despise the glorious Creator, to 
shun His presence, to resist His mandates, in- 
volved no guilt! If Adam was finally saved, 
the acts of that hour needed no forgiveness; if 
he was finally lost, the sins of that hour could 
not be punished. True, he was originally en- 
dued with all the faculties requisite to secure 
accountability, but that accountability ceased at 
the moment that the first act of sin was perpe- 



14 ADAM WITHOUT GRACE. 

trated. After the first transgression he was no 
longer a responsible agent. To be amenable at 
the bar of his Judge, he must have an adequate 
supply of grace, and that supply the Judge 
himself was in duty bound to furnish. Until 
that gift, the gift of grace, was bestowed, the 
new-born rebel might have it all his own way. 
There was no law in the statute book of Heaven 
to reach him. If grace had been withheld for 
a whole year, then the acts of that whole year 
would have been irresponsible acts. If grace 
had been kept back a thousand years, the high 
crimes and misdemeanors compressed into that 
vast period would in justice have passed unre- 
buked and unpunished. And if grace had never 
been conferred at all, the traitor would have 
been completely absolved from all obligation to 
love and obey his righteous Sovereign; through 
all the future it would have been his dreadful 
privilege to hate and blaspheme his Maker! 
His Maker could not have called him to an ac- 
count, for the simple Arminian reason that, 
where no grace is given, the sinner cannot be 
taken in hand for his misdeeds. Here, then, we 
have two figments engrafted on the teachings of 
God's holy word — the loss of man's free agency 
by sin, and the restoration of free agency by 



BISHOP HEDDING. 15 

grace. The whole circle of theological errors 
does Dot furnish two instances of purer fiction. 
Such, however, is the ingenuity with which these 
singular fictions have been dovetailed in the 
great system of Divine truth, that multitudes 
take it for granted that they do of right belong 
there. 

Your late excellent Bishop Hedding, when a 
young man, once filled an appointment to preach 
in a Free-Will Baptist house of worship some- 
where in New England — I think it was in New 
Hampshire. It was a custom among the mem- 
bers of that denomination, after preaching, to 
make an exhortation, or, as they called it, to 
"free their minds." When Mr. Hedding had 
finished his sermon, several of the members rose, 
one after another, to their feet, to confirm the 
truth of what the minister had said to them. 
At length a brother, who was perfectly delighted 
with the discourse, took the floor, to free his 
mind also. After saying a great many handsome 
things about the sermon, wishing to pay the 
preacher a particularly agreeable compliment, 
he concluded by saying : "Brethren, you have 
heard the truth to-day, the whole truth, and 
more than the truth." When you Methodist 
Arminians teach that Adam was constituted the 



16 FREE AGENCY NOT LOST. 

federal head and representative of his posterity, 
you say the truth. When you further teach, as 
Mr. Watson does, that death — temporal, spirit- 
ual, and eternal — passed upon all men in conse- 
quence of the sin of the first man, you say the 
whole truth. But when, in addition to this, you 
maintain that free agency was lost in the fall, 
and afterward restored by grace, you travel out 
of the record — you say more than the truth. 

John Smith. 



LETTER IY. 

Dear Brother : — 

You ask me to state our views of free agency. 
This is easily done. Adam was created a free 
agent, was a free agent when he fell, was a free 
agent after the fall, and will to all eternity be a 
free agent. Holiness does not communicate 
freedom to the will, and sin cannot destroy it. 
Gabriel is a free agent, but he is not more free 
than he would be were he an angel of darkness ; 
and the Devil is as truly a free agent now as 
when he was an angel of light. What is free- 



FREE AGENCY NOT LOST. 17 

dom of the will? What is free agency? The 
power to act according to one's choice; the power 
to do what one desires and aims to do. A holy 
angel loves God and obeys Him; he does this 
from choice, and is consequently a free agent. 
A fallen angel hates God and opposes Him ; he 
does this from choice, and he, also, is a free 
agent. It is just so with the race to which we 
belong ; some obey the Lord Jesus Christ and 
are saved, others refuse to obey Him and are 
lost. Both those who obey and those who do 
not obey, those who are saved and those who 
are lost, are alike responsible for their acts ; and 
they are alike responsible for their acts because 
they are equally free. The impenitent sinner, 
for example, persists in rejecting the great sal- 
vation, and in doing this, he simply follows the 
dictates of his will, he will not come to the 
Saviour. He will not be saved ; in nothing that 
he does is he more free than in this ; he could 
not be more free than he is, because he is already 
as free as it is possible for any creature to be; 
it is his deliberate choice to be what he is, an 
impenitent sinner. He is, it is true, the slave of 
sin, but he is a voluntary slave ; he is deeply in 
love with his ponderous fetters; he refuses to be 
emancipated, and rejects with scorn all offers of 
3 



18 FREE AGENCY NOT LOST. 

deliverance ; arguments and appeals directed to 
the understanding and the conscience are thrown 
away; no promises of future happiness, no 
threatenings of future wrath, nothing short of 
Omnipotent power can shake his fixed purpose ; 
infatuated as he is, the sinner is in all this per- 
fectly free. 

These are our views on this subject, and we 
are sure that they are as strictly in accordance 
with the dictates of common sense as they are 
with the sacred teachings of the. Scriptures. To 
sum up the matter, you and we agree, and also 
disagree. We are agreed in this, that man is a 
free agent. But in this we differ: you believe 
that free agency was lost in the fall, we hold 
that it was not lost; you think that free agency 
was restored by grace, we maintain that as it 
could never be lost, it could not as a matter of 
course be restored. 

John Smith. 



ADAM AND HIS POSTERITY. 19 



LETTER V. 

Dear Brother: — 

The trial of our first parents was, according 
to the representations of Anninianism, virtually 
of the nature of a farce. It was all sham. Far 
be it from me to charge you or your brethren 
with regarding that great transaction in the 
light of a farce, or with actually believing that 
it was all a sham. To say this, would be to 
slander the denomination to which you belong. 
But the teachings of your system, brother, do 
certainly show up the whole matter in the light 
of a solemn farce. Now for the proof. Your 
standards maintain that the whole human race 
were put on trial in the person of Adam, their 
federal head and representative. "Adam," ac- 
cording to Richard Watson, the great expounder 
of Methodist Arminianism, "Adam is to be re- 
garded as a public man, the head and repre- 
sentative of the human race, who, in consequence 
of his fall, have fallen with him." Again he 
says : " The circumstances of the case infallibly 
show that in the whole transaction they — Adam 
and Eve — stood before their Maker as public 



20 ADAM AND HIS POSTERITY. 

persons, and as the legal representatives of their 
descendants, though in so many words they are 
not invested with these titles." "The threat- 
enings pronounced on the first pair," continues 
Mr. Watson, "have all respect to their posterity 
as well as to themselves. The death threatened 
affects all. In Adam all die ; death entered by 
sin, that is by his sin, and then passed upon all 
men." Nor does he explain this of natural 
death alone. "The opinion of those divines 
who include, in the penalty attached to the first 
offense, death, bodily, spiritual, and eternal, is 
not to* be puffed away by sarcasm, but stands 
firm on inspired testimony."* So far all is plain, 
and true as it is plain. But we are now, unhap- 
pily, about to enter the domain of fancy and of 
farce. You hold the doctrine that God, though 
He so placed mankind at the disposal of their 
head and chief that if he stood, they stood, if 
he fell, they fell, had not the right to leave them 
to the full consequences of the representation 
to which He had Himself subjected them. This 
is, it must be owned, singular enough, and has 
all the force of contradiction. Methodists ac- 
cuse Universalists of representing Jehovah as 

* Watson's Theological Institutes, part ii. chap, xviii. 



ADAM AND HIS POSTERITY. 21 

threatening sinners merely to alarm them, as 
employing the most fearful terms of warning 
and rebuke simply — for nothing. The accusa- 
tion is just. But a similar accusation may be 
laid against the Methodists. They admit, in- 
deed, that God threatened Adam's posterity as 
well as Adam himself; but it was a mere TJni- 
versalist threat, it meant nothing. We, on the 
contrary, believe, not only like you, that death 
in its three terrific forms was denounced against 
our race, but we believe, what many of you do 
not believe, that the awful penalty was just. 
We stand abashed indeed, we feel our littleness, 
we are conscious of our deep ignorance, when 
we approach this mysterious, this incomprehen- 
sible transaction. But we are bold to claim, 
that God always does what is perfectly fair and 
right; and what we ourselves would see is per- 
fectly right and fair, had we only understandings 
equal to the high task of comprehending His 
ways, had we only line enough to fathom the 
ocean of His perfections. With an unflinching 
front, therefore, we maintain that it would be 
in accordance with justice in the strictest sense, 
had the full penalty annexed to the first sin com- 
mitted on our planet been carried into execu- 
tion. For this we are assailed in no measured 
3* 



22 ADAM AND HIS POSTERITY. 

terms, from ten thousand Arminian pulpits. 
The Rev. Dr. R. S. Foster, in a work entitled 
"Objections to Calvinism," printed at the Meth- 
odist Book Concern in Cincinnati, has resort 
to the following style of argumentation: "Sin- 
ners were born corrupt, and so cannot be guilty 
for this : they cannot escape from corruption, 
and so are not guilty for remaining in it." "His 
disability came with him into the world ; it was 
communicated as a part of his existence ; it was 
his very and essential nature ; and now, was he 
to blame for an existence and nature which were 
forced upon him, which never, at any period, he 
consented to, and which he never could avoid ? 
His first parent may be to blame, but surely he 
cannot be responsible ; for he not only did not 
bring his disability on himself, but it was im- 
posed on him, without the possibility of its re- 
moval. Let him sin, no being in the universe 
can censure him, for he is not to blame."* Thus 
Dr. Foster openly takes sides with rebellion, and 
publicly proclaims to the universe that, had not 
the effects of Adam's sin been neutralized by the 
atonement of Christ, the sinner must go clear ; 

* Objections to Calvinism, from the article, "Effectual 
Calling.*'' 



ILLUSTRATIONS. 23 

while the whole blame of all the sins and crimes 
perpetrated from the creation of the world, 
would have to rest with God Himself; and the 
reverend doctor would have no scruples to tell 
his Maker so to His face. But if, as Mr. Wat- 
son declares, the threatenings pronounced on the 
first pair had all respect to their posterity, as 
well as to themselves, those threatenings must 
most certainly have been just, otherwise God, 
the Fountain of justice, could never have given 
utterance to them. If then the threatenings 
were just, it is clear that the penalty denounced 
must also have been just, and it is quite as clear 
that, if it had been unjust to let the penalty de- 
nounced take its natural course, the threat itself 
of the penalty would have been equally unjust. 
If, for example, it would be unjust in a human 
tribunal to confine an innocent man in the peni- 
tentiary, it would also be an act of gross wrong 
to sentence him to the penitentiary. If it is a 
sin to inflict the penalty of death on a person 
guilty of no crime, it must likewise be a sin to 
pronounce sentence of death on such a person. 
A judge of one of our criminal courts — we will 
suppose — sentences to the gallows a batch of un- 
offending creatures who he knows are innocent, 
who he well knows deserve not such a fate ; in 



24 APPLICATION OP ARMINIAN THEORY. 

full knowledge, however, of their freedom from 
all guilt, he solemnly proceeds to declare that, 
on such a day, between such and such hours, the 
terror-stricken wretches before him shall hang 
by the neck till they are dead. Would not every- 
body shrink from a farce so revolting ? Now 
you Arminians, my dear brother, are chargeable 
with placing the Supreme Judge of the world in 
an attitude precisely analagous to this. He, to 
whom the future is as the present, to whom 
things that are not are as things that are, has 
before Him in the person of Adam the repre- 
sented human race ; with that race He is about 
to try a dangerous and an unlawful experiment ; 
an experiment for which, in future ages, He will 
be called to account by Arminians, Pelagians, 
and infidels. He knows that the first parent 
is to blame, and that with the first parent the 
blame of the great transgression should rest. 
He knows that it would be contrary to every prin- 
ciple of right and justice to inflict woes and suffer- 
ings on millions of millions innumerable, on ac- 
count of the sin of that one individual ; for if the 
Rev. Dr. R. S. Foster knows that this was un- 
just, God, the all-wise God, must certainly have 
known it too. In spite of all this, however, in 
spite of the guiltlessness of humanity, in spite 



DOCTRINE OF COMPENSATION. 25 

of the flagrant wrong of making the transgres- 
sion of their chief the gronnd of condemnation 
to unborn myriads, He proceeds to pass sen- 
tence of death — death bodily, spiritual, and eter- 
nal — on the entire series of generations from the 
beginning to the end of time. I conclude as I 
begun, with the remark that the trial of our 
first parents was,, according to the teachings of 
Arminianism, of the nature of a farce — a sol- 
emn, a stupendous, an awful farce. 

John Smith. 



LETTER VI. 

Dear Brother: — 

The writer of the Epistle to the Romans, 
after expatiating on the deep things of God — 
the entrance of sin into the world by the first 
man ; the superabounding grace of the second 
Man ; the rejection of the Jews ; the calling of 
the Gentiles ; the sovereignty which has mercy 
on whom it will have mercy, and hardens whom 
it will harden — triumphantly challenges any 
one, man or angel, to show that the Creator is 
in his debt; and if this can be made to appear, 



26 DOCTRINE OF COMPENSATION. 

assures the modest claimant, in terms of lofty 
satire, that it shall be recompensed to him 
again. The Apostle probably never suspected 
that this challenge, so boldly given, would be as 
boldly accepted. He could hardly have foreseen 
that, in future ages, a branch of the Christian 
Church, pluming itself on its superior sanctity, 
claiming to be the special depositary of gospel 
grace, and numbering its membership by hun- 
dreds of thousands, would actually stand forth, 
and, in behalf of all the sinners from the begin- 
ning to the end of time, set up a plea against 
Jehovah Himself for damages sustained by them 
in the fall of their great forefather. The united 
body of Arminian Methodists, Episcopal and 
non-Episcopal, hold it as an article of faith that, 
after the fatal revolt in Eden, God, as a just 
and righteous Being, was under obligation to 
do one of two things : to destroy Adam at once, 
to prevent the propagation of his species ; or, to 
make adequate compensation to his posterity 
for the loss they sustained in that great catas- 
trophe. 

" Had not God provided a Redeemer," says 
Dr. Adam Clarke, your favorite commentator, 
" He would no doubt have terminated the whole 
mortal story by cutting off the original trans- 



DOCTRINE OF COMPENSATION. 27 

gressors ; for it would have been unjust to per- 
mit them to propagate their like in such circum- 
stances that their offspring must be unavoidably 
and eternally miserable." As a matter of fact, 
the original transgressors were not cut off, but 
were permitted to propagate their like. To meet 
this difficulty, Arminian ingenuity has been 
taxed to the utmost, and the result is a new 
doctrine of atonement. It is indeed a very odd 
sort of atonement, yet it holds the same relation 
to the Arminian system that the keystone does 
to the arch. It is not the atonement of Christ. 
It is not an atonement made by rebellious sin- 
ners to their holy and righteous Creator for 
wrongs done to Him. It is an atonement which 
the holy and righteous Creator has made to re- 
bellious sinners for the stupendous wrong which 
He inflicted on them, by constituting Adam 
their federal head and representative, and thus 
involving them in all the direful consequences 
of the fall. "It is impossible," says the Rev. 
Kichard Watson in his Theological Institutes, a 
standard authority in your Church, "it is im- 
possible to impeach the equity of the Divine 
procedure, since no man suffers any loss or in- 
jury ultimately by the sin of Adam, but by his 
own willful obstinacy; the abounding grace by 



28 DOCTRINE OF COMPENSATION. 

Christ having placed before all men, upon their 
believing, not merely compensation for the loss 
and injury sustained by Adam, but infinitely 
higher blessings, both in kind and degree, than 
were forfeited by him." The unwarrantable 
notion that God dealt unfairly by us in placing 
us on trial in the person of our federal head 
and representative, lies in full sight at the bot- 
tom of this reasoning. Take this idea out of 
the way, and the sentence just quoted has no 
meaning. The argument of Mr. Watson is to this 
effect : Mankind sustained a fatal loss and injury 
through Adam. For this, God Himself is held 
responsible. To repair the mischief, He sent 
His only begotten Son into the world ; and 
now, since Christ has died for sinners, it is im- 
possible to impeach the equity of the Divine 
procedure, ample compensation having been 
made to our injured race. But suppose that 
such compensation had not been rendered ; sup- 
pose that Christ had not died — what then ? The 
inference is plain. In that case, the equity of 
the Divine procedure might be impeached, and 
there is no doubt would be impeached, by all 
Arminians on the face of the earth. Your 
friend Doctor Foster is very explicit and very 
decided on this subject. " Sinners," he says, 



DOCTRINE OF COMPENSATION. 29 

"were born corrupt, and so cannot be guilty for 
this ; they cannot escape from corruption, and 
so are not guilty for remaining in it ; and there- 
fore" — such is the decision of the sapient doc- 
tor — "therefore they have no guilt whatever 
because of their corruption." 

"We deny," such is the language of Dr. 
Wheclon, the able editor of the Methodist Quar- 
terly Review, " we deny that God might have 
brought the whole human race into existence 
without a Saviour, with a full certainty of eternal 
death upon the whole."* 

The Methodist- Arminian theory of the fall 
may then be stated thus : The first transgress- 
ors ought to have been cut off, to prevent the 
propagation of their species ; but since they 
were not cut off, their posterity had a right to 
demand redress of their Maker. Justice re- 
quired that a fair compensation should be made, 
that an adequate remedy should be provided for 
the wide-spread evils of the grand apostasy. A 
full and fair compensation was made, an adequate 
remedy was provided, in the salvation of the 
Redeemer. And now that these claims have 
been honorably met, damages paid in full, and 

* Methodist Quarterly Review, October, 1861. 
4 



30 AN UNJUST MONARCH. 

losses properly made up, under such circum- 
stances it is impossible to impeach the equity of 
the Divine procedure. Men cannot now rea- 
sonably find fault with God. This is Arminian- 
ism, pure and simple. 

Let us now, for a moment, look at the princi- 
ple that underlies this theory. A monarch, con- 
trary to every principle of right, deprives a 
subject of an estate worth a hundred thousand 
dollars, and compensates him for this act of in- 
justice by giving him, on certain conditions, an- 
other estate worth a million. These conditions 
are, however, so repugnant to his feelings and 
tastes, that, three chances to one, he will reject 
the proffered favor, and die at last in abject 
poverty. It is impossible, according to the 
Arminian way of thinking, to impeach the 
equity of this ruler's procedure, since the sub- 
ject sustains no loss or injury ultimately, except 
by his own willful obstinacy. He is, it is true, 
without his consent, stripped of his just rights 
and possessions; but then, if he can only: be 
brought to accept it, a much larger sum comes 
into his possession — and thus abundant compen- 
sation is rendered. But it might be asked, can 
a subsequent benefit, however valuable, sanctify 
a crime ? Is it ever right to do evil that good 
may come ? Suppose you rob a man of all 



APPLICATION. 31 

he is worth, and afterwards repay him, with in- 
terest — you may make him perfectly satisfied ; 
he may even be thankful for having been robbed ; 
yet this cannot alter the nature of the first act. 
You may pay principal and interest, doubled 
and trebled in the bargain ; if you deprived him 
unlawfully of what was his own, you acted on a 
wrong principle, you did what you had no right 
to do — you are in truth a robber still. 

If God by a questionable act brought the 
humau race into a situation into which it was 
not right to bring them ; if, after placing them 
on trial in the person of their federal head and 
representative, He had not the right to leave 
them to all the consequences of that trial — and 
Arminians boldly contend that He had not the 
right — then a wrong of portentous magnitude 
was perpetrated. Xo subsequent benefits could 
change the nature of that wrong. Not all the 
blessings, temporal and spiritual, bestowed and 
to be bestowed ; not all the grace, common and 
special, conferred and to be conferred ; not even 
the gift of His only-begotten Son to redeem, 
nor the gift of the Holy Spirit to regenerate 
and sanctify, — could balance the fearful account, 
or afford a proper compensation to mankind for 
such a gigantic wrong. 

John Smith. 



32 GRACE NOT COMPENSATION. 



LETTER TIL 

Dear Brother: — 

Methodist ministers, it is to be feared, are too 
apt to accustom their people to look at the salva- 
tion of the Redeemer in the light of a compensa- 
tion. God is the Compensator ; the compensated 
party is the much injured race of Adam; the 
compensation is the atonement made by the 
Lord Jesus Christ. This doctrine, though we 
search the Bible in vain to find it there, is to the 
Arminian theologian exceedingly precious, and 
dear to him as the apple of his eye. Notions so 
clearly unscriptural we boldly assail, and we as 
boldly maintain that the work of Christ is not 
and cannot be, in the proper sense of the term, 
a compensation. To vast multitudes of our fel- 
low-sinners this so-called compensation is, as a 
matter of fact, no compensation at all. Men 
come into the world with dispositions strangely 
repugnant to the claims of the Divine law. Of 
this singular repugnance the sinner, of himself, 
never obtains the mastery. The fatal difficulty 
begins where moral agency begins, and where 



GRACE NOT COMPENSATION. 33 

the difficulty begins the compensation ought 
also to begin. Now if the human race must be 
compensated for the loss they sustained by the 
Divine arrangement, it would seem to be but 
fair that the compensation should in every way 
be a full and just equivalent. Moral rectitude 
ought at least to have an equal chance with 
moral depravity, so that every person might set 
out on his career not a whit less inclined to 
good than" to evil. Now look at facts. The 
enmity of the carnal mind is not always over- 
come by grace. The tendency to evil is not 
balanced by an equal tendency to good. The 
disposition to rebel is not balanced by an etyual 
disposition to obey. The love of sin is not bal- 
anced by an equal love of holiness. With what 
propriety, then, can you call the gospel scheme 
of salvation a scheme of compensation ? The 
Apostle Paul declares that we are saved by 
grace. He says nothing about compensation. 

John Smith. 

4* 



34 GRACE NOT COMPENSATION. 



LETTER Till. 

Dear Brother : — 

I fear that you have not calmly considered 
the serious difficulties which beset your favorite 
doctrine of compensation. That doctrine strikes 
at the Divine integrity. All human beings, 
without exception, are made sinners by the dis- 
obedience of the first Adam, but all human 
beings are not, without exception, made right- 
eous by the obedience of the second Adam. 
All men are not compensated alike. Look at 
Moses and Pharaoh, at Peter and Judas, at 
Saul of Tarsus and his fellow-persecutors on 
the road to Damascus. But even if the same 
number of persons were, as a matter of fact, 
made righteous by the obedience of One, that 
were made sinners by the disobedience of an- 
other ; even if all, over whom death reigned by 
one man's offense, were also to receive abund- 
ance of grace, and of the gift of righteousness, 
so as to reign in life by one, Jesus Christ, your 
theory would still be environed with embar- 
rassments of no small magnitude. It simply 
comes to this, that God inflicted a stupendous 



GRACE NOT COMPENSATION. 35 

wrong on our race, but that He graciously 
atoned for the wrong by conferring a more 
stupendous benefit. The manifest violation of 
the rights of mankind, in holding them responsi- 
ble for an act to which they did not and could 
not give their personal assent, would still stand 
out in bold and terrible relief, and the united 
acclamations of redeemed humanity would as- 
cend from hearts oppressed with a sense of the 
Divine injustice. 

Remember, my dear brother, we do not give 
utterance to such pernicious sentiments. God 
forbid tha.t we should stigmatize that great 
transaction as unfair or unjust. We believe, on 
the contrary, that as the Creator is a Being so 
absolutely holy that He can by no possibility 
do wrong, it was perfectly just and right that 
all men should be represented by Adam, and 
that all men should by his disobedience be made 
sinners. And we believe this because the Bible 
says so. If others are not satisfied with such 
reasons, if others feel that it is safe to trust their 
Maker, only just so far as He makes it plain to 
their apprehension that He has committed no 
errors, and has done no injustice ; if others 
cannot bring themselves to put confidence in 
the Divine testimony, until that testimony has 



36 GRACE NOT COMPENSATION. 

been corroborated by independent proofs from 
other quarters, we may be sorry for it, but we 
cannot help it. I repeat, since the Holy Scrip- 
tures distinctly set forth the stern truth, that by 
one man's disobedience all were made sinners, 
and subjected to the penalty of death, we be- 
lieve it. And we will, by the blessing of God, 
rest in the belief of this, in spite of all the wry 
faces, and upturned noses, and sardonic grins 
of all the wiseacres, theological and psycholog- 
ical, in the land, — from the Rev. R. S. Foster, 
hater of Calvinism, to the Rev. Henry Ward 
Beecher, lover of novelties and oddities ; and 
from the Rev. Henry Ward Beecher, lover of 
novelties and oddities, down to the Rev. Theo- 
dore Parker, rider of hobbies and preacher of 
Pantheism ; and from this lower deep down to 
Parker Pillsbury and William Lloyd Garrison, 
apostles of anarchy and blasphemy. 

Calvinists pretend not to a wisdom that man 
does not possess. We are not backward to 
acknowledge our incompetence to scan the ways 
•of an Infinite Being — ways which that Being 
fhas Himself declared to be past finding out ; 
^and a becoming modesty forbids us to think 
•that we can find out what is absolutely beyond 
rthe reach of the human understanding. True 



VOYAGE TO SIRIUS. 31 

science, whether it relates to matter or mind, 
to this world or the world to come, has its lim- 
its; and the genuine philosopher knows where 
to stop. It is only the quack that is not deterred 
from attempting impossibilities. A proposal 
in the Atlantic Monthly, by Oliver Wendell 
Holmes, to start on an expedition to the fixed 
stars, in one of Prof. Wise's balloons, for the 
purpose of measuring with, a tape line the exact 
distance between Boston and Sirius, would, 
without question, be regarded as bordering 
somewhat on the extravagant. But would such 
a proposal be more extravagant, or more ab- 
surd, than the attempt which is so often made 
to apply human line and plummet to measure 
the ways and fathom the thoughts of the In- 
finite, and Eternal God ? To the bold voyager, 
about to undertake so extensive a progress, we 
would be tempted to say, ." Doctor, we admire 
your courage, but with becoming deference to 
your enlighted judgment, is there not a natural 
impossibility in the way of your getting to the 
Dog Star ? Are you sure that you are not 
buying leagues of tape for nothing ? Have you 
carefully considered the mishaps that might be- 
fall you after you got out of sight of the little 
mundane sphere to which you at present belong ? 



38 A PROVERB. 

But, seriously, sir, you have undertaken a labor 
more difficult than a voyage to the regions of 
space. The old Holy Bible, with its sublime 
doctrines and its heaven-born principles, is, in 
your judgment, getting out of date, and you 
have as good as thrown it aside. You are for 
an Americanized Bible ; a Bible that shall give 
its sanction to the religion set forth in the 
'Autocrat of the Breakfast Table,' that is, a 
Bible with the name of Christ expunged. The 
talents which God has given you are employed 
in trying to write down the glorious mysteries 
of redemption. But, sir, you are wasting quarts 
of ink and reams of foolscap to no purpose. 
Your ancestors had a proverb to the effect that 
only angels and fools attempt what lies beyond 
the sphere of mortals ; angels, because they are 
angels, and have the requisite faculties ; and 
fools, because they are fools, and know no bet- 
ter. That you sometimes attempt what lies be- 
yond the province of poor ignorant mortals, 
your writings make it clear enough ; and, doc- 
tor, that you are not an angel, is just as clear to 
the majority of your readers." 

But to leave the sage of the modern Athens, 
to whom this passing compliment is due, and to 
come back to my good brother Peter. We call 



OUR CREED. 39 

no man on earth master. Among our fellows, 
indeed, we lay claim to a noble independence ; 
but when Jehovah condescends to speak, we 
humbly desire to know our proper places ; and 
our proper places are the places of little chil- 
dren, who are not yet out of the spelling book, 
and who must, for a long while to come, take 
many things on trust and unhesitatingly believe 
what God says, simply because He says so. 
Our creed is not only because God has said so 
and so, therefore it must be true, but because 
He has done so and so, therefore it must be 
right. Such arguments are proof against all 
sophistry. Here we take our stand ; and, standing 
on these principles, we find that there is a rock 
beneath our feet. Here also we are very bold, 
and amid the deafening shouts from a hundred 
thousand throats, hoarse with vociferations of 
"injustice!" "cruelty!" "tyranny!" we pro- 
claim, and we would proclaim with sound of 
trumpet, that God, the holy, the righteous God, 
though He has in His adorable mercy provided 
salvation for Adam's lost race, owes compensa- 
tion to no man on earth. 

Here, again, brother, we have the advantage 
of you. No expression, certainly no cordial 
expression, of approbation ever escapes from 



40 AMENS. 

Arniinian lips, when God's dealings with man- 
kind, in the matter of the fall, are placed on 
their naked merits I could go into the largest 
Methodist congregation in jour city, and, pro- 
provided they did not know that it was John 
Smith that addressed them, I might, by setting 
forth the amazing grace that delivered us from 
the curse pronounced in Eden, perchance draw 
out scores and scores of "Aniens," some faint, 
•others long and loud, from as many pious hearts. 
But should I undertake to show that God was 
acting on a principle just as sound, when all 
men were constituted sinners by the disobedi- 
ence of Adam; that He did not go too far, 
when, on account of the great transgression, 
sentence of death was passed on Adam's entire 
posterity ; that He might with most perfect 
justice have left our apostate race to their well 
deserved fate ; that He was in no sense bound 
to provide a Saviour, and that He owed them 
no compensation, — a dead silence would most 
likely pervade the assembly. Not a solitary 
"Amen" would break forth, as an indorsement 
of these great scriptural truths. Possibly some 
of my hearers might even go to the length of 
muttering, "abominable Calvinism!" between 
their teeth. Let the scene be changed. John 



CREDITOR AND DEBTOR. 41 

Smith retires. The Rev. Dr. Foster ascends the 
pulpit. Now mark the contrast. "Brethren," 
exclaims the author of " Objections to Calvin- 
ism," "brethren, the parent might be to blame 
for his own sin, but how could a whole race be 
to blame for the violation of a covenant to 
which they did not and could not give their as- 
sent, and over which they had no more control 
than the Angel Gabriel ? No, my brethren, God 
could not in justice have left the human race to 
perish in the ruins of the fall ; He was in duty 
bound to make a fair and righteous compensa- 
tion, by bestowing a full measure, and an equal 
share of grace on all mankind." And again the 
"Amens" and the "Bless the Lords" would be 
as numerous, as hearty, as long, and loud as 
at first. 

These different styles of preaching represent 
a striking difference between your doctrinal sys- 
tem and ours. In the Arminian scheme, the 
fallen human race is creditor and plaintiff; the 
great Creator, Debtor and Defendant. In the 
Calvinistic scheme, God Almighty is Creditor 
and Plaintiff; the depraved and sinful human 
race, debtor and defendant. 

John Smith. 
5 



42 NATURAL DEPRAVITY. 



LETTER IX. 



Dear Brother: — 

You have often read and admired David's 
profound expressions of penitential sorrow, in 
the Fifty-first Psalm: "Behold, I was shapen 
in iniquity, and in sin did my mother conceive 
me." Theodore Parker would laugh outright 
at such a confession. In Dr. Holmes's Ameri- 
canized religion, a sentiment so unphilosophical 
could stand no possible chance of a place. The 
Bev. Dr. Foster, Methodist as he is, would 
modestly inquire whether a man can be to blame 
for that over which he had no control — whether 
it was his fault that he was conceived in sin 
and shapen in iniquity ? From such persons, 
however, this is only natural. Nothing better 
could be expected of them. The nature of sin 
is not understood until its power is felt and 
day-dreams give place to sober realities. It is 
not until the penetrating light of God's most 
holy law throws its searching beams on the hor- 
rible darkness in which sin enshrouds the under- 
standing, that a human being finds himself to be, 



NATURAL DEPRAVITY. 43 

what the Bible says every human being is, dead 
in trespasses and sins by nature. To such a 
person the language of David's confession be- 
comes dreadfully clear and intelligible. Then 
caviling ceases ; the consciousness of moral de- 
pravity becomes painfully intense ; and sneers 
and grins are succeeded by groans and tears. 
Such a man would appreciate an Americanized 
Bible as an astronomer would be likely to ap- 
preciate an Americanized sun. 

The Holy Scriptures set forth in very striking 
terms the doctrine of human depravity. This 
doctrine we both believe. Were I a mere con- 
troversialist, I might, perhaps, be tempted to 
misrepresent your sentiments. But you know 
me too well, brother, to suppose that I could 
descend to a practice so little in keeping with 
the dignity of a minister of the Gospel. I re- 
joice that this fundamental truth is held in com- 
mon by us. From the rant of the crazy fanatics 
who boast of an inner light superior to Revela- 
tion, and from the fatal errors of those twin 
sisters of heresy, Universalism and Unitarian- 
ism, our churches are, and G-od grant that they 
may ever be, as far removed as zenith from 
nadir. Let the world know this. We are not 
enemies. We are brethren. And let it not be 



44 COMPENSATION AGAIN. 

forgotten that it is the errors which your system 
has engrafted on scriptural truths, and not the 
scriptural truths of your system, which we feel 
it our duty to combat. If you Arminians were 
only willing to acknowledge that it was right 
for God to do as He did, grace or no grace ; if 
you were only willing to acknowledge that He 
might with perfect justice have left mankind to 
perish in the ruins of the fall, — there would be 
no difference, and there could be no difficulty, 
between us on this point. But this you will not 
do. You claim compensation for the loss sus- 
tained in Adam. Our feelings of reverence re- 
volt at such a claim, and we are constrained by 
a strong sense of duty to enter our solemn pro- 
test. We are firm believers in salvation by 
grace, and we can, by a stretch of the imagina- 
tion, conceive of a salvation by compensation, 
though the Bible says nothing about it ; but that 
sinners should be saved by compensatory grace 
or by a gracious compensation, is what we are 
free to confess we have not the capacity to com- 
prehend. "In the Divine Mind," says Dr. Mc- 
Clintock, former editor of the Methodist Quar- 
terly Review, "our whole race appears as an 
aggregated unity, as well as a collection of per- 
sonal individualities." The curse that was pro- 



COMPENSATION AGAIN. 45 

nounced on Adam was pronounced also on his 
posterity. The doctor sees no difficulty in this. 
Why, it might be asked, is there no difficulty ? 
This is his answer : " Since whatever was for- 
feited in the first Adam has been either restored 
or compensated for by the second Adam."* 
Here we have it again — compensated for by the 
second Adam ! This is ever the one leading 
idea of Arminianism. In your theology, some 
things are suppressed which ought to be brought 
out to view. It is silently taken for granted 
that the principle by which the destiny of a race 
was put in the power of its head and progenitor, 
was radically wrong ; that, inasmuch as a stu- 
pendous wrong had been done, God could not, 
consistently with the dictates of honor and jus- 
tice, leave mankind in this predicament; that, 
therefore, justice absolutely demanded for the 
apostate offspring of an apostate father an ade- 
quate remedy and full compensation. All this 
lies at the bottom of your theory of original 
sin. Now here we are at variance, and we must 
continue to be at variance with you. For your 
theory of compensation we have, we confess, a 
strong dislike — a dislike rising even to absolute 

* Methodist Quarterly Review, April, 1854. 
5* 



46 AN ILLUSTRATION. 

hate. Calvinists can never be brought to believe 
iu salvation by compensation ; they are too 
firmly fixed in the belief of salvation by grace. 

This is a topic which, as I have more than 
once observed, your preachers and writers are 
apt to touch very lightly. This is emphatically 
the weak spot, this is the most vulnerable part 
in their doctrinal system, and they know it well. 
They seem to go on the principle that the less 
there is said about it, the better. The Arminian 
doctrine of compensation, I have sometimes 
thought, is kept merely as a kind of show. 
Gilded and varnished, to the unpracticed eye 
nothing could appear more beautiful. But, like 
other articles kept for show, it is not meant to 
be taken down and handled—at least not by 
rough Calvinistic fingers. 

Among the finest illustrations of dodging the 
question, as it is called, a Methodist brother 
once gave, when plied with the interrogatory, 
"What would be the condition of mankind, if 
the Saviour had not died for them?" "Oh! 
but He did die, and now all men can be saved !" 
was the quick reply. "Yes, no doubt He did 
die for sinners, and all that come to Him will be 
saved; but suppose He had not died — what 
then ?" " But He did die," was again the reply. 



HUMAN NATURE. 41 

" You are not answering my question, Mr. Wil- 
kins; suppose He had not died?" "Not a 
supposable case, for He did die for all man- 
kind," was the rejoinder of Mr. Wilkins. '" Was 
God then under a positive obligation to provide 
salvation for sinners?" "By no means. He 
was not under obligation, but He did provide 
salvation for all men." " Might not God, then, 
have left all mankind to perish in their sins?" 
" Certainly not, because Christ died for all 
men," was the ready answer of Mr. Wilkins. 
Here the conversation ended, and here also 
ends this letter. 

John Smith. 



LETTER X. 

Dear Brother: — 

" The Arminian, as fully as the Calvinist, 
admits the doctrine of the total depravity of 
human nature, in consequence of the fall of our 
first parents." This is not my statement ; it is 
the statement of the Rev. Richard Watson, the 
ablest theologian of your church. This scrip- 



48 HUMAN NATURE. 

tural doctrine has always been a stone of stum- 
bling, but the stuniblers were, perhaps, never so 
numerous as in this nineteenth century. If a 
little learning in Pope's time used to make a man 
a fool, how shall we describe the .havoc a little 
science makes of men's sober senses in our 
times ? Shoals of Pelagians more heterodox 
than Pelagius, Pelagians of the school which 
believes in a religion without grace, and hopes 
for a heaven without a Saviour ; the school of 
Fowlers and Wells, of Dr. Bellows and of Dr. 
Chapin, threaten a general bankruptcy of the 
faith once delivered to the saints. The mere 
mention of total depravity is sufficient to dis- 
compose the philosophic gravity of these gen- 
tlemen. Human nature is quite good enough 
for them, it needs only the right kind of training 
to elevate it to perfection. The result is what 
might be expected ; the system of one pretender 
has a run to-day, and the new-fangled theories 
of another pretender have a run to-morrow ; 
while, the day following, the dupes of both tie 
their faith to the leading-strings of a third pre- 
tender, taller by a head than his brethren in im- 
pudence and audacity. But it is all in vain. 
The catholicons and panaceas, the elixirs of 
health and the vaunted cure-alls of the 'whole 



QUACKS. 49 

tribe of quack doctors are not more surely des- 
tined to go by the board, than are the various 
patented would-be reliefs that are peddled about 
by spiritual quacks, male and female, for the 
behoof of fallen humanity. The Bible declares 
in emphatic terms, that men are dead in tres- 
passes and sins, and universal history confirms 
the awful truth. We are of a race deep in love, 
not with holiness, but with sin. Carrion does 
not so attract the keen eye and the keener scent 
of the vulture, the mire and filth of the cess- 
pool do not so attract the tastes and propensi- 
ties of the swine, as sin attracts the souls of men, 
and draws them within its deadly sphere. The 
poison is infused into every system. The spirit- 
ual vision is distorted. Every object is out of 
its place. A mole-hill shoots into the air and 
assumes the huge dimensions of a mountain ; a 
mountain dwindles and shrinks to a mole-hill. 
Shadows flit across the brain and are taken for 
realities. Fact becomes fiction, and fiction fact. 
Could rational beings be deluded so by anything 
but sin ? Could anything else so deprave the 
affections, so darken the understanding, so warp 
the judgment ? Could Dr. Holmes labor under 
the singular hallucination that he, poor man, had 
a call to Americanize the Bible ? Could Wen- 



50 COMPENSATORY GRACE. 

dell Phillips, eloquent in the cause of Jacobin- 
ism, keep up his blasphemous tirades? Could 
Brigham Young the adulterer, and Judge Ed- 
monds the sorcerer, and Parker Pillsbury the 
apostate, and Theodore Parker the pantheist, 
be what they are, if the doctrine of total de- 
pravity were not founded in truth ? When these 
persons speak, they speak as their nature 
prompts them. When they act, they act na- 
ture. Brigham Young surrounded by the con- 
cubines of his harem; Theodore Parker de- 
riding faith and deifying reason; Judge Ed- 
monds nightly consulting the Devil and receiving 
oracular responses; Pillsbury, Phillips, Garri- 
son and company foaming out ribaldry and 
atheism as often as the fit takes them — is all 
perfectly natural. 

Let us now come back to the Arminian theory 
of compensation. This curious theory, examined 
in the light of such facts, appears excessively 
lame. As long as it is bolstered up between 
real Gospel truths, it makes out to hobble along ; 
but unsupported in this way, it must sink down 
in hopeless imbecility. Mr. Watson affirms that 
we all came into the world with natures totally 
depraved, and he affirms what is true ; but it is 
not true that ungodly men are compensated for 



COMPENSATORY GRACE. 51 

the loss of original righteousness. Where is 
the compensation ? Is it in the plan of salva- 
tion ? But that is not a scheme of compensa- 
tion. If it were, each sinner would be entitled 
to an equal share with his fellow-sinners. All 
suffered alike by the fall, and if the represented 
human race was unfairly dealt with — and there 
is reason to fear that Arminians too often 
secretly think so — all would have an equal 
claim for damages, all would be entitled to an 
equal compensation. This is one of the plain- 
est dictates of common sense, and as the Bible 
and common sense go hand in hand, it would 
also be one of the plainest dictates of the Bible 
if it meant to set forth such a doctrine. But 
such an idea it is just as impossible to find there 
as it is to find the term itself. With grace, in- 
deed, rich, amazing, infinite grace, the Scriptures 
do in truth overflow, but of compensation they 
know nothing whatsoever. Now to a share of 
grace, no sinner, be he who he may, can possibly 
have a valid claim, otherwise grace is no more 
grace. I say it in all kindness, but it is one of 
the many blunders which you Arminians commit, 
to call compensation grace, and grace compen- 
sation ; words standing for things as wide apart 
as the poles. The grand scheme of redemption 



52 COMPENSATION A FAILURE. 

is founded in the undeserved mercy and goodness 
of God; why then do your preachers put it 
into the heads of the people, that justice re- 
quires compensation to be made to the posterity 
of fallen Adam ? Do you not see that the com- 
pensation, even in your view of it, does not 
cover the loss ? Some are indeed unspeakable 
gainers. To them that receive abundance of 
grace and of the gift of righteousness, so as to 
reign in life by Jesus Christ, the loss is more, 
vastly more than made up. But do all men re- 
ceive abundance of grace and of the gift of 
righteousness ? Will all men reign in life ? Did 
Yoltaire, did Yolney, did Gibbon, did Hume, 
did Thomas Paine, did Mirabeau, did Danton, 
did Robespierre, infidels all, receive abundance 
of grace and of the gift of righteousness ? and 
is there reason to believe that those bitter scof- 
fers are now reigning in life with Jesus Christ ? 
On your scheme, the most hardened sinner 
could put in a plea against God himself: "OLord, 
my rights were invaded before I was born, and, 
therefore, I reject all offers of compensation ; I 
demand to be reinstated in my original rights ; I 
commit many sins, I acknowledge, but as these 
flow from a nature essentially corrupt, the guilt 
must not lie at my door. Why was I born with 



COMPENSATION A FAILURE. 53 

such a nature ? I have been misused. It is true 
that I have a chance of being saved; a Saviour 
has been provided ; compensation has been 
made : but I do not choose to accept the com- 
pensation ; I will stand on my rights." There 
are but few men, even the most audacious in 
wickedness, who would venture on such a style 
of address; and yet this is just the style of that 
very popular book among Methodists, Foster's 
"Objections to Calvinism." On the one hun- 
dred and sixty-sixth page of that most singular 
work, we find the following declaration : " Sin- 
ners were born corrupt, and so cannot be guilty 
for this ; they cannot escape from corruption, 
and so are not guilty for remaining in it ; 
and, therefore, they have no guilt whatever be- 
cause of their corruption." What words of 
comfort ! how cheering ! how very precious ! 
In acknowledgment of a doctrine so full of con- 
solation, Parker Pillsbury might say : "My lusts 
were so strong, and my depravity in general so 
great, that Christianity lost its last hold on me, 
and I tumbled into the blind vortex of atheism. 
But as I was born corrupt, the Rev. R. S. Foster, 
of the Methodist Episcopal Church, informs me 
that I cannot be guilty for this. Many thanks 
for the information." Oliver Wendell Holmes 



54 A REAL DILEMMA. 

might say with truth : " My pride and self-suffi- 
ciency were so inveterate that I was simple 
enough to propose to emasculate the Holy 
Scriptures, in order to give my countrymen an 
Americanized Bible. But insomuch as my pride 
and self-conceit were born with me, good, ortho- 
dox Dr. Foster has most conclusively shown that 
I cannot be guilty for this." Judge Edmonds 
might say : "I despised the sacred teachings of 
God's infallible word, and, attempting to pry 
into things not given to mortals to know, fell 
into the snare of Satan. The result was those 
shocking falsehoods with which I deceived others 
and was deceived myself. But as I was born 
with such propensities, and simply obeyed the 
dictates of my corrupt nature, that excellent and 
most trustworthy Arminian doctor, Dr. Foster, 
insists that I cannot be guilty for this." But 
how the doctrine laid down by Mr. Watson in 
his Theological Institutes — " The Arminian, as 
fully as the Calvinist, admits the doctrine of the 
total depravity of human nature, in consequence 
of the fall of our first parents," — is to be recon- 
ciled with the doctrine laid down by Mr. Foster 
in his Objections to Calvinism — " Sinners were 
born corrupt, and so cannot be guilty for this ; 
they cannot escape from corruption, and so are 



BIBLE PORTRAITS. 55 

not guilty for remaining in it ; and, therefore, 
they have no guilt whatever because of their 
corruption," — how these two conflicting state- 
ments are to be reconciled with each other, is a 
problem which I would respectfully hand over to 
your next General Conference, for solution. 

John Smith. 



LETTER XL 

Dear Brother : — 

The delineation of character in the Bible, like 
everything else found there, is perfect. Only men 
of genius, or inspired men, could have drawn those 
master-pieces. All antiquity had but one Homer, 
and modern Christendom has not furnished three 
writers able to sketch such life-like characters as 
we have in the Scriptures. Memoirs by the 
dozen are annually thrown before the public ; 
but which of them delineate, with perfect truth 
and impartiality, real men and real women ? 
Look at Sprague's Annals of the American 
Pulpit, a work of merit, the labor of more than 
one cultivated mind, the labor of years. Com- 



56 BIBLE PORTRAITS. 

pare now with these the biographical sketches 
of the Bible. Here the subjects did not sit for 
their likeness, prim and stiff and starched, 
combed and dressed up for the occasion; they 
were taken just as they appeared in every-day 
life. The deformities as well as the excellencies, 
what was good and what was bad, the striking 
faults and the striking virtues, are all before us. 
We blush to hear Abram tell a lie ; we are 
shocked to see Noah drunk ; we stand con- 
founded at the flagrant adultery of David ; 
Peter's fall, and the cowardice of James arid 
John take us by surprise ; and we wonder at 
Paul and Barnabas getting into a quarrel. 
Unlike modern character-mongers, the Bible 
presents us with one and but one perfect por- 
trait, and that portrait is perfect only because 
the Great Original was absolutely perfect. 

Equally clear and correct is the picture of 
human nature in general. The outlines are 
bold and distinct ; the touches remarkably sim- 
ple and striking, representing the thing itself to 
the life. The whole is of a dark and gloomy 
aspect. Men do not love God. They refuse to 
put their trust in Him. They neglect His glory. 
There is no desire to please Him, and while His 
favor has no attractions, His wrath inspires no 



SEARCH FOR HAPPINESS. 5T 

dread. Rebellion is the rule, obedience the ex- 
ception ; and the exception has its root, never 
in nature, but always in grace. Native-born, 
loving and obedient children, there are abso- 
lutely none. All are children of disobedience 
by habit, by the force of example, and, by what 
is more powerful than habit or example, by 
nature. In search of happiness, the bowels of 
the earth are torn open, the ocean's depths are 
sounded, the blue vault of the sky is pierced ; 
but happiness is nowhere to be found. The 
whole universe, in all its lengths and breadths, 
in all its heights and depths, is not of dimensions 
vast enough to fill the fatal void effected by the 
agency of sin. Such is fallen human nature. 

The Arminian theory virtually makes God 
the author of all this evil. Arminian s them- 
selves would, indeed, repel such a charge. This 
is readily conceded, but the theory that under- 
lies the doctrine of compensation is obnoxious 
to this grave charge. Pelagianism and natural- 
ism, whose God is not our holy Lord God, re- 
ject the doctrine of original sin, and, as a matter 
of course, reject the arguments by which it is 
established. You, on the other hand, receive 
the doctrine, but impugn, not directly, but 
indirectly, the Divine goodness and justice. 
6* 



58 INNOCENT GUILT. 

Arminians profess to hold, in the fullest sense, 
the depravity of human nature, and then with 
strange inconsistency contend that men are not 
to blame for their depravity. But surely some- 
body must be to blame for such a fearful state of 
things. There is guilt, deep guilt somewhere. 
Totally depraved, yet without guilt ! A race 
of totally depraved innocent creatures ! This 
sounds odd enough. But listen to what the 
Rev. Dr. Foster has to say on this point. He 
is boldly contending that every human being is 
entitled to a share of grace, and takes the sin- 
ner's part in the following style : " Let it not 
be said he (the sinner) brought this disability 
upon himself. If this were so, it would relieve 
the case. But this is not the fact. This dis- 
ability came with him into the world, it was 
communicated as a part of his existence, it was 
his very and essential nature. And now was he 
to blame for an existence and nature which were 
forced on him; which he never, at any period, 
consented to, and which he never could avoid ?"* 
This is certainly very plain talk. Theodore 
Parker could hardly beat it. Natural depravity 
and rebellion against God have found an able 

* Objections to Calv. Art. Effectual Calling. 



INNOCENT GUILT. 59 

champion and a fearless defender in Dr. Fos- 
ter. Let us look at facts. Rebellion against 
Heaven's High King has been inaugurated on a 
tremendous scale in our planet. The rebellion 
has its root and origin in the awful depravity of 
the heart. Men are rebels from fixed choice. 
Their whole souls turn away w^th loathing from 
the hateful rule of their rightful Lord and Sov- 
ereign. In this they are warmly defended. 
" Had they anything whatever to do in making 
that corrupt nature ?" asks the author of " Ob- 
jections to Calvinism." Thus the sinner, it 
seems, is not even to take to himself the smallest 
, share of guilt. He is spotless as innocence itself. 
11 Was he to blame for an existence and nature 
which were forced on him ?" This is a very 
significant question. A corrupt nature forced 
on the poor sinner ! Who, then, according to 
Dr. Foster, is to blame for this depraved na- 
ture ? Be astonished, ye heavens, it is no 
other than God himself ! Thus God is virtually 
made the author of sin by the advocates of 
Arminianism. 

What Dr. Foster's real sentiments are I cannot 
tell ; but when he has Calvinism to fight against, 
he stoutly maintains that there is nothing worthy 
of blame in the desperate enmity of the carnal 



60 INNOCENT GUILT. 

mind against the holiness of God. Now he 
either believes that we are guilty for being cor- 
rupt and depraved, or he does not. If he be- 
lieves that we are guilty for being depraved and 
corrupt, he is not an honest man, because he 
argues against his own belief. If he believes 
that we are not guilty for being depraved and 
corrupt, he makes God the author of sin. 

Do you say that the Methodist Church ought 
not to be answerable for the absurdities and 
extravagancies of one man ? But is not his 
work printed at one of your Book Concerns ? 
Has it not the indorsement of one of your 
bishops ? And is it not found lying in the book-, 
case of every Methodist preacher ? So that, 
after all, Mr. Foster stands not alone in this 
matter. He is one of a multitude. Not all the 
steam-presses in America could print the end- 
less harangues, the tropes, the rant and fustian 
delivered from Arminian pulpits against Cal- 
vinists, for maintaining that human nature, fallen 
and depraved, is guilty, dreadfully guilty before 
God. Why is it that we are to be so abused, 
because we charge home on men themselves and 
not on God, the guilt where it belongs ? I will 
close this letter by asking another question: 
Did you ever know or hear of a Methodist min- 



SHORT CUT. 61 

ister, either iii this country or hi Europe, or in 
any other quarter of the globe, who has been 
known to proclaim, openly and honestly to the 
world, that human depravity is but another 
name for human guilt, and that God might with 
perfect righteousness have left the whole race 
to perish without a Saviour ? If such a Meth- 
odist minister is anywhere to be found, I would 
be most happy to make his acquaintance. 

John Smith. 



LETTER XII. 

Dear Brother : — 

"As we sinned only seminally in Adam, if 
God had not intended our redemption, His 
goodness would have engaged Him to destroy 
us seminally, by crushing the capital offender 
who contained us all, so there would have been 
a just proportion between the sin and punish- 
ment."* So says the Rev. John Fletcher, one 
of the great lights of Arminian Methodism. 

* Third Check. Vol. i. p. 146. 



62 SHORT CUT. 

"Had Christ not undertaken human redemp- 
tion, we have no proof, no indication in Scrip- 
ture, that for Adam's sin any but the actually 
guilty pair would have been doomed to con- 
demnation." So says the Rev. Richard Wat- 
son, a standard theologian of your denomina- 
tion. " Had not God provided a Redeemer, 
He no doubt would have terminated the whole 
mortal story, by cutting off the original trans- 
gressors." So says Dr. Adam Clarke, whom all 
Methodists delight to honor. These writers, 
when they say this, seem to think that they 
have taken a short cut through a tangled 
thicket. Instead, however, of relieving the dif- 
ficulty, the short cut leads to a trackless wilder- 
ness. We see here the shifts to which able 
minds, overlooking the plain teachings of the 
Bible, are reduced. The doctrine taught in 
these quotations is, that mankind were not in 
reality represented by Adam. If Adam fell, we 
were not to come into existence at all, we were 
to remain a mere nonentity, a mere nothing. 
But how could sin be imputed to mere nonentity, 
to mere nothing ? How could death pass on 
mere nonentity, on mere nothing ? Sometimes 
you maintain that the whole human race were 
represented by Adam as their federal head, and 



GRACE AND DEPRAVITY. 63 

were like him exposed to death, temporal, spirit- 
ual, and eternal. " The first consequence," says 
Mr. Watson, " of this imputation is the death 
of the body, to which all the descendants of 
Adam are made liable, and that on account of 

the sin of Adam The second consequence 

is death spiritual, that moral state which arises 
from the withdrawment of that intercourse of 
God with the human soul, in consequence of its 

becoming polluted The third consequence 

is eternal death, separation from God and end- 
less banishment from His glory in a future state." 
At other times you are ready to ask, in the 
language of Mr. Foster, " How can we be to 
blame for a sin committed thousands of years 
ago by our ancestor ? How could we be justly 
exposed to punishment for that to which we did 
not and could not give our assent, and over 
which we had no more control than the Angel 
Gabriel ?" How, it may be asked, does it hap- 
pen that the same denomination believes that it 
would be the height of injustice to permit a 
whole race to come into the world totally de- 
praved and corrupt, on account of Adam's sin, 
and that a whole race does, nevertheless, as a 
matter of fact, come into the world totally de- 
praved and corrupt, on account of Adam's sin ? 



64 GRACE AND DEPRAVITY. 

The glaring inconsistency of this is known and 
felt, and to any but an Arminian the difficulties of 
adjustment would appear insurmountable. The 
fertility of Arminian ingenuity has, however, de- 
vised a most ingenious solution of the difficulty. 
Grace brings a race of sinners into existence, 
which justice required to be left, and which jus- 
tice, had not mercy interfered, would actually 
have left in non-existence. But for the Saviour 
Adam and Eve would have been the only sin- 
ners in the world. He died, and the result has 
been literally a world full of sinners. The ad- 
vent of the Redeemer had, as your theory indi- 
cates, a twofold design : first to bring a non- 
existent race of totally depraved creatures into 
being, and then to save as many as possible of 
these depraved creatures, who otherwise would 
never and could never have been depraved 
creatures at all. Justice would have annihilated 
the posterity of Adam. Grace reproduced 
Adam's posterity, and reproduced them a race 
of sinners, with the offer of pardon and life set 
before them. Grace makes all men sinners, in 
order to make it possible for all men to be 
saved. It is something like this : Suppose a 
man that has violated no law, and done no 
wrong, should be sentenced to die on the gal- 



GRACE AND DEPRAVITY. 65 

lows. Suppose further, however, that a knife 
is put in the hand of this innocent person, and 
that he is told, " Sir, you have been sentenced 
to die an ignominious death on the scaffold 
before you. It is true, indeed, that you have 
done nothing to merit such a punishment, but 
still you have no right to impeach the goodness 
and integrity of the court, since there is a 
chance for you to cut the rope with this knife, 
and to run for your life." This is a simple, and 
not unfair illustration of the Arminian theory of 
the fall. The human race are in strict justice 
innocent, absolutely innocent of the sin of Adam. 
Dr. Foster's wrath is stirred, and he indignantly 
asks how we could be to blame for a sin com- 
mitted by another before we were born. The 
sin of Adam is, nevertheless, imputed to all 
mankind. The consequence is that the race, by 
hundreds and thousands of millions, comes into 
the world with bodies doomed to the grave, 
with souls already dead in siu, and in imminent 
and awful danger of eternal damnation. A 
Saviour has been provided for those who ought 
never to have been permitted to come into the 
world ; and your writers and preachers main- 
tain that now no man has a right to impeach 
the Divine justice, a way of escape from im- 



66 DOOR OR DUNGEON. 

pending ruin being opened to all. Permit 
me to set forth the inconsistencies of the Ar- 
minian theory on this subject by another illus- 
tration. A multitude of poor wretched creatures 
find themselves in a dark and noisome dungeon. 
A door of escape from the dreadful prison stands 
wide open. Now it certainly makes some dif- 
ference, whether the dungeon is built for the 
sake of the door of escape, or the door of escape 
is made for the sake of the dungeon. ' You hold 
the former, we believe in the latter. It certainly 
makes some difference also, whether the miserable 
inmates are entirely free of guilt, and are thrust 
into prison merely for the purpose of giving 
them a chance to make good their escape, or 
whether the law finds them really guilty and 
deserving punishment. Arminians take the 
former ground, we take the latter. We con- 
tend that the Divine law found the whole race 
of Adam guilty, grace or no grace, salvation or 
no salvation. "By one man sin entered into 
the world, and death by sin, and so death passed 
on all men, for that all have sinned." So say 
the Scriptures, and the Scriptures cannot err. 
The law of God, who is a Being infinitely right- 
eous and infinitely wise, would never, no never, 
have passed sentence of condemnation on all 



god's supremacy. 67 

the generations of Adam, had such a sentence 
been in any proper sense unjust in itself. It 
must have been right and just that all mankind 
should be made sinners by the disobedience of 
one man, or the Holy Ghost would never have 
asserted the astounding fact. Let God be true 
and every man a liar. On this rock we build 
an impregnable fortress. The fact that I, or 
you, or Mr. Foster, or Dr. Whedon, or this 
philosopher, or that theologian, cannot grasp 
this subject, is little to the point. The ad- 
ministration of this world, we should never for- 
get, is safely lodged in the hands of Him who 
does nothing but what is right, and who in tones 
of lofty rebuke says to us all, " Be still and 
know that I am God;" "As the heavens are 
higher than the earth, so are my ways higher 
than your ways, and my thoughts than your 
thoughts." 

John Smith. 



68 PARALLELISMS. 



LETTER XIII. 



Dear Brother: — 

This letter, which shall not be a long one, 
will be a letter of parallelisms. According to 
the Scriptures, Christ came to save sinners, who 
not only actually existed, but who would have 
been in actual existence had He never conde- 
scended to lay down His life for them. Accord- 
ing to Arminianism, Christ came to save sinners, 
who, had He not laid down His life, would never 
have been sinners at all, because they never 
would have been brought into existence. The 
fundamental idea of the Bible is, that the mys- 
terious dispensation under which all men were 
made sinners was, independently of grace, a 
righteous dispensation. The fundamental idea 
of Arminianism is, that the dispensation under 
which all men were made sinners was not, inde- 
pendently of grace, a righteous dispensation. 
The fundamental idea of Scripture is, that Jesus 
came to save sinners, who would certainly have 
existed, and who would as certainly have been 
lost, had He not shed His blood for them. The 



PARALLELISMS. 69 

fundamental idea of Arminianism is, that Christ 
died for sinners, who but for His death would 
never in fact have existed ; and who, having no 
existence, could not possibly be lost. Accord- 
ing to the Scriptures, all men would have per- 
ished had not Christ died. According to 
Arminianism, if Christ had not died, none, ex- 
cept Adam and Eve, would have perished. 
According to the teachings of the Bible, the 
Saviour died for real sinners. According to 
the teachings of Arminianism, Christ died for 
real sinners too, but they had, in the first in- 
stance, to be brought into existence as sinners, 
by grace. 

Let me now, my brother, apply the Arminian 
theory, by way of interpretation, to the fifth 
chapter of Romans. By one man sin entered 
into the world, and death by sin, and death 
ought to have passed on him alone, since he 
alone was guilty ; nevertheless, by grace, death 
passed also on all men, for, through grace, all 
have sinned. For as by one man's disobedience, 
only that man himself could, on all the princi- 
ples of justice and right, be regarded as a sinner, 
nevertheless, through grace, all men were also 
made sinners. Therefore, as by the offense of 
one, judgment came in reality only on himself, 



70 PARALLELISMS. 

and could come only on himself, in accordance 
with all the requirements of simple, straight- 
forward justice; yet by grace, through the of- 
fense of one, judgment actually came also upon 
all men unto condemnation. Thus, if it were not 
for grace, there would be no sin in the world, 
because there would be no sinners ; and there 
would be no sinners, because, as you argue, the 
human race would never have been permitted to 
exist at all. Thus we see what grace, in the 
Arminian view of it, has done for mankind. 
Nor is this all that grace has accomplished ; all. 
the wicked acts perpetrated in the world are 
likewise due to grace, in accordance with the 
well-known Arminian axiom, that where there is 
no grace bestowed, there can be no responsibil- 
ities. By grace, then, men do good, and by 
grace they do evil. . By grace they glorify God, 
and by grace they serve the Devil. By grace 
Moses was the deliverer of Israel, and by grace 
Pharaoh was their persecutor and oppressor. 
By grace Peter was an Apostle, and by grace 
Judas was an apostate. By grace Luther was 
a reformer, and by grace Yoltaire was a blas- 
phemer. By grace Richard Baxter was the 
author of the "Saint's Rest," and by grace the 
Rev. Dr. R. S. Foster is the author of "Objec- 
tions to Calvinism." 



CALVINISM. 1 1 

The different views of human nature taken by 
Calvinists, Arminians, and Pelagians furnish 
an interesting subject of speculation. Accord- 
ing to Pelagianism, men are sinners only by 
practice. According to Calvinism, men are 
sinners by practice and by nature. According 
to Arrainianism, men are sinners by practice, by 
nature, and by grace. 

John Smith. 



LETTER XIY. 

Dear Brother: — 

It is the peculiar glory of the great system 
of truth styled Calvinism, that it exalts the Di- 
vine attributes of justice and mercy. In our 
theology, GOD is on the throne. The creature 
is taught to know his place. The sinner, un- 
worthy to lift his eyes from the ground, stands 
self-convicted in the presence of Infinite Holi- 
ness, and humbly sues for pardon. In our ears 
the thunders of Sinai roll with a majesty more 
awful, the dying accents of the mighty Sufferer 
on Calvary have a richer and sweeter tone, and 
salvation has a depth and comprehensiveness of 



72 FROG POND. 

meaning greater by far than is known to any- 
other theological system. We stand amazed at 
God's unmerited goodness; we cannot compre- 
hend how He could be moved to pity for a race 
so sunk in depravity and guilt. To many, our 
expressions of wonder, love, and praise appear 
extravagant and even foolish. It is not, how- 
ever, difficult to account for this. By salva- 
tion we mean one thing and they mean another 
thing. Between the Atlantic Ocean and a mill 
pond the difference is very great ; but the differ- 
ence is not so great as the vast interval between 
the grace of the Bible and the grace held forth 
in certain modern pulpits. 

This illustration recalls the scenes of child- 
hood. You cannot have forgotten, brother, the 
pond near our father's house, which we boys used 
to call the Pacific Ocean. It was certainly a 
very big name for a very little body of water. 
Do you remember the sea captain who once 
stayed in the family some two or three days, and 
entertained us so much with an account of his 
voyages? While he was portraying the gran- 
deur of the mighty Pacific, we were all the while 
thinking on our frog pond. When, in glowing 
language, he described the enormous swell of 
mountain waves threatening to engulf his ship, 



FROG POND. 73 

our pine shingle craft scudding over the ripples 
of our little ocean was before us ; the monstrous 
whales and sharks of which he spoke reminded 
us of our polliwogs and tadpoles ; and while he 
talked about depths which the longest line had 
never measured — why, we could touch the bot- 
tom of our Pacific, anywhere, with a broom- 
handle. 

That frog pond furnishes a striking and useful 
analogy. There are men in whose view nothing 
is infallible except their own judgments. Where 
their reason falters, all reason stops; when their 
lead has touched bottom, there are no depths 
beyond. Such persons regard themselves spe- 
cially qualified to sit in judgment on the ways 
of God, and authoritatively to pronounce what 
belongs to Him and what does not belong to 
Him ; what He may do and what He may not 
do. At the head of this set of profound think- 
ers stands the ex-reverend Ralph Waldo Emer- 
son, the worshiper and echo of Thomas Car- 
lyle ; nor does he stand alone. The mention of 
such a name readity supplies the imagination 
with a long line of worthies, ex-reverend and 
ex- Christian, male and female, with now and 
then a so-called reverend and so called Chris- 
tian, whose frog pond casts the Pacific Ocean 
altogether into the background. 



74 LIBERALISM. 

But to come back from figure. Do not sup- 
pose that I am classing Arminian Methodists 
with such errorists. This I would not dare to 
do. But there is one thing I do not hesitate to 
do; I do not hesitate to charge you with 
giving aid and comfort to the enemies of the 
Lord Jesus Christ, our common Master. We 
never take sides with them against you ; I wish 
I could say that you never take sides with them 
against us. That persons ignorant of the 
Scriptures and of the power of God, that the 
declaimers, who from week to week advertise 
speeches called sermons, to be preached for 
clap-trap, because they have nothing to say 
about a crucified and exalted Redeemer, should 
set a low value, or no value at all, on the grace 
of God, is not at all surprising. The stream 
cannot well rise higher than its source. We do 
not look for salvation by grace in the harangues 
of the Rev. M. D. Conway, "liberal Unitarian," 
nor in those of the Rev. Dr. Chapin, ''liberal 
Universalist," and we do not expect much in 
the discourses of the Rev. Henry Ward Beecher, 
"liberal Congregationalist," who delights to 
hold sweet communion with the haters of ortho- 
doxy. But the world has a right to look for 
better things from a denomination that claims 
to be founded in grace itself. 



CAUSE AND EFFECT. 15 

In spite of this claim, however, it is a peculiar 
feature of Arminiauism that salvation is not so 
much a matter of wonder as a matter of course. 
It is just what might have been and ought to 
have been expected. It would rather be a won- 
der if there were no Saviour. The fact that 
this planet is peopled by an order of creatures 
dead in trespasses and sins, is, according to 
your way of thinking, of itself a sufficient rea- 
son to expect that something should be done 
for them. In the Arminian code, the fall of 
man and the redemption of Christ sustain the 
relation of cause and effect. They are insepar- 
ably and necessarily connected, so that the one 
cannot be regarded as existing without the 
other. We hold, indeed, that if there were no 
fallen men, there would be no Redeemer; but 
you hold, also, that if there were no Redeemer, 
there would be no fallen men. The work of 
Adam and the work of Christ you look upon 
as two inseparable parts of a grand whole. 
The work of Christ, it is true, you designate to 
be a work of grace, but it is grace which both 
the honor of God and strict justice required 
should not be withheld. This is strange enough. 
You might, with the same show of reason, main- 
tain that the miasm which engenders chill fever, 



76 NO PHYSICIANS NO DISEASES. 

and quinine which breaks the chills, are to be 
regarded as necessary parts of each other. The 
disease and the remedy, sin and grace, rebellion 
and pardon, one and inseparable ! 

Let us look a little longer on this. If there 
were no sinners, there would be no Saviour; 
this is what both you and we believe. If there 
were no Saviour, there would also be no sinners ; 
this is what only you and not we believe. If 
there were no bodily diseases in the world, there 
would be no physicians ; this represents Cal- 
vinism. If there were no physicians in the 
world, there would be no bodily diseases ; this 
represents Arminianism. " Had not God pro- 
vided a Redeemer," says Dr. Clarke, " He would 
have finished the whole mortal story, by cutting 
off the original transgressors." But God did 
provide a Saviour, and the mortal story, with its 
dreadful tale of sin and suffering, has been con- 
tinued to the present hour. Had no Saviour 
been provided, there would be no sinners. A 
Saviour has been provided, and the sands of the 
sea cannot equal the number of rebels and sin- 
ners, whose crimes and misdeeds have cursed 
the earth. But if the fall of man and redemp- 
tion by Christ are to be viewed as two insepar- 
able parts of a stupendous whole ; if the former 



NO PHYSICIANS NO DISEASES. 11 

is never to be contemplated except in connec- 
tion with the latter ; if justice demanded that 
salvation must be provided for a race of lost sin- 
ners; if God must send His Son; if Christ must 
die to make compensation for the loss sustained 
by Adam, — what, I ask, what becomes of the 
great doctrine of salvation by grace ? If I were 
an Arminian, I do not see how I could celebrate 
in terms of lofty praise the goodness and mercy 
of God. The farthest I could go, I think, would 
be to say, " We are indeed born with natures 
depraved and corrupt, but we have now no right 
to complain, since compensation has been made 
by thine only begotten Son for the loss sustained 
by Adam. We thank Thee for this act of jus- 
tice. But if Thou hadst left us where, by put- 
ting us on trial in our federal head, Thou didst 
permit us to be brought; if Thou hadst not 
made good this loss ; if compensation had not 
been rendered ; if Thou hadst left mankind to 
perish in their sins," — brother, I dare not ad- 
dress my holy Sovereign in the lauguage of the 
Arminian creed ; you dare not, your writers and 
preachers dare not do it. I may be mistaken, 
but I will venture the assertion that even Dr. 
Foster himself dares not do it. 

John Smith. 



78 THE REV. JOHN JONES. 



LETTER XY. 



Dear Brother: — 

The Rev. John Jones is, by the appointment 
of your Conference, one of my clerical neigh- 
bors. With agreeable manners, he seems to 
possess also good qualities of mind and heart. 
His talents, however, he himself appears to 
think shine to the best advantage in the line of 
controversy; and whenever this brother feels 
like exercising his talents at sharp shooting, 
Calvinism is commonly the favorite target. 
Many an arrow dipped in gall he lets fly, on 
such occasions, against election, against predes- 
tination, against the perseverance of the saints, 
against the Divine sovereignty ; but the strong- 
est bow is bent, the bitterest arrow is adjusted, 
the deadliest aim is directed against "the hor- 
rible doctrine of infant damnation." If the 
Rev. Mr. Jones stood alone in this matter, if 
he were the only one among his brethren that 
resorted to such tricks, his name would not ap- 
pear at the head of this letter. He is, however, 
only one of many. Such tricks are, it is to be 
feared, but too well known to the majority of 



THE REV. JOHN JONES. 79 

Methodist preachers. When Unitarians or TTni- 
versalists strive to excite odium against our 
doctrines, wicked as are their aims, there is at 
least no inconsistency in their wickedness. 
They are known and recognized as enemies of the 
cross of Christ. The doctrines of redemption are 
to them little better than doctrines of humbug. 
Even the salvation of adults, in their creeds, 
requires little or no grace ; the salvation of 
infants, absolutely none at all. Now it has been 
often remarked that the spiritual guides in your 
church seldom, some of them never, take to 
task the errorists who claim salvation for in- 
fants, not as a matter of pure grace, but as a 
matter of simple justice. If fault is found at 
all, it is in soft and honeyed phrase ; while 
neither Webster nor Worcester can furnish all 
the adjectives and nouns set in array against 
Calvinists for believing that infants, like adults, 
are lost, and can be saved only by God's un- 
speakable mercy. This secret sympathy with 
the enemies of grace, and this vituperation of 
the advocates of grace, has long been a re- 
proach to the Methodist Episcopal ministry. 
A Universalist champion, setting out to attack 
the Calvinistic doctrine of infant salvation, 
should he run short of arguments, has but to 



80 INFANT SALVATION. 

borrow the logic and rhetoric of the nearest 
Methodist pulpit; or, if he desires to see how 
his own sentiments look in print, the writings of 
the Rev. Peter Cartwright, or of the Rev. Dr. 
R. S. Foster, will furnish rich and striking 
specimens. 

A few evenings ago Mr. Jones and I met at 
the table of a common friend, where the conver- 
sation turned on the salvation of infants. As 
Mr. Hill, our host, though a class-leader, was 
not aware of the inconsistencies of the Armin- 
ian creed, I proposed to Mr. Jones that he 
should favor us with his views on the point in 
dispute. To this he readily agreed, and began 
thus : "I believe, or rather I know, that all in- 
fants are saved through the atonement of Christ, 
because it would be clearly unjust that they 
should be lost. I read in my Bible, ' Suffer 
little children to come unto me, and forbid them 
not, for of such is the kingdom of Heaven' — for 
of such is the kingdom of Heaven," he repeat- 
ed, with a peculiar twinkle of the eye; "that, 
brother Smith, does not sound much like infants, 
not a span long, in hell." To Mr. Hill, who had 
often listened to such arguments without per- 
ceiving their fallacy, this mode of reasoning 
seemed perfectly conclusive. In order to expose 



TNFANT SALVATION. 81 

the glaring contradiction involved in maintain- 
ing that an atonement was made for those that 
were not lost, I inquired if infants were in them- 
selves innocent and pure. "By no means," re- 
plied Mr. Jones ; " all infants fell in their great 
forefather, but Christ died to take away original 
sin, and it would be shocking injustice to hold 
them answerable for the sin of Adam." How 
it could be just that infants should fall in Adam, 
and how it could be at the same time shockingly 
unjust to hold them answerable for the sin of 
Adam — sheer contradiction as it was — evidently 
appeared to be no contradiction in the view of 
the Rev. Mr. Jones. " There is one point," I 
continued, " on which I should like to have your 
opinion. Do you really think that it was just 
that infants should fall in Aclam, and come into 
the world with natures depraved and corrupt?" 
"Yes," was the reply ; "because Christ was to 
make an atonement." "But suppose no atone- 
ment had been made — -would it have been just 
in that case ?" Mr. Jones evidently did not 
like to answer my question in this naked form ; 
but, on being pressed, at length said : " No, it 
would not have been just." "Do you believe, 
then, Mr. Jones, that infants are saved by 
grace?" "I do," said he. "You affirm," I 
8* 



82 INFANT SALVATION. 

continued, "that infants are saved by grace — 
and you also affirm that, according to the prin- 
ciples of justice, they could never be lost. 
Now will you be so good as to explain what 
you mean by infants being saved by grace ? 
Would it not be as well to strike out the word 
grace and insert the word justice?" My cleri- 
cal neighbor seemed somewhat nettled by these 
interrogatories, and, to make the matter worse, 
Mr. Hill interposed with another question : 
" Brother Jones, is it really a doctrine held by 
the Methodist Episcopal Church, that infants 
are born with natures totally depraved ?" The 
reply was in the affirmative, accompanied by a 
significant look that seemed to say: "Brother 
Hill, I wish you would mind your own busi- 
ness." Our host seemed to think that he was 
minding his own business, and proposed a second 
question, "Why should infants come into the 
world with natures totally depraved ?" A feeling 
of impatience seemed to come over Mr. Jones, 
who answered, in a very curt manner, "Because 
they fell in Adam." " But why, brother Jones, 
should they fall in Adam? Could they help 
this ? Has not Dr. Foster, in his unanswerable 
book, forever settled this question ? He says 
that Adam may have been to blame for his own 



INFANT SALVATION. 83 

sin ; but how, the doctor asks, can his posterity be 
to blame for that over which they had no more 
control than the Angel Gabriel ? And did you 
not, on last Sabbath, in refuting Calvinism, as- 
sert that we had no more to do with Adam's sin 
than the man in the moon ?" " Have I not told 
you," rejoined Mr. Jones, "that Christ died for 
the salvation of all infants V "I know you 
did ; but let us suppose that Christ had not 
died — what then ?" "But Christ did die," was 
the sharp rejoinder. This reply, or perhaps the 
tone in which it was uttered, seemed to satisfy 
Mr. Hill, but it did not satisfy me. "The in- 
consistencies in the Arminian creed, gentle- 
men," said I, "never appeared so striking to my 
mind as they do this evening. It was just, ac- 
cording to Arminianism, that infants should fall; 
and, according to Arminianism, it was not just. 
According to Arminianism, infants are saved by 
grace ; and, according to Arminianism, if God 
did not save infants by grace, He would be, to 
quote the dreadful language of John Wesley 
and Mr. Foster, an Almighty Tyrant. Be con- 
sistent, Mr. Jones ; drop the term grace alto- 
gether, and say at once that justice — absolute 
justice — secures the salvation of infants, and that 
infants would have been just as certainly saved, 



84 INVESTIGATION NECESSARY. 

if Christ had not laid down his life for them." 
Mr. Jones, instead of replying to these objec- 
tions, suddenly rose from the table, looked at 
his watch, and remarked that he had almost for- 
gotten an engagement to be fulfilled at that 
very moment. 

John Smith. 



LETTER XVI. 

Dear Brother : — 

The ground on which the doctrine of infant 
salvation rests ought to be thoroughly explored. 
There are few doctrines so imperfectly under- 
stood. Church members could be counted by 
the thousand, who have never given themselves 
the trouble to find out what the Scriptures teach 
concerning this matter. It is this want of in- 
vestigation on the part of the people that gives 
your preachers, in some respects, the advantage 
both of those who, like the Universalists and 
Socinians, reject grace altogether, and of those 
whose system like ours is founded wholly in 
grace. Nor are some of your brethren slow to 



A COMPARISON. 85 

avail themselves of this advantage. Justice, 
says the TJniversalist, simple justice calls for 
the salvation of infants. By grace, says the 
Calvinist, and by grace alone, are infants saved. 
The Methodist Arminian adopts the sentiments 
of the TJniversalist, but borrows the language 
of the Calvinist, and stoutly maintains, in de- 
fiance of all consistency, that infants are saved 
both by justice and by grace. In the TJniver- 
salist scheme, grace is quietly dropped, and 
infants are saved purely by justice. On the 
Arminian plan, infants are saved either justly 
by grace, or graciously by justice. These two 
systems, separated by a very wide interval in 
other respects, here approach each other and 
almost touch. To invert the ordinary rule of 
comparison, the difference between TJniversalism 
and Arminianism on this subject is the differ- 
ence between the Rev. Dr. E. C. Chapin and 
the Rev. Dr. R. S. Foster. Dr. Chapin, TJni- 
versalist, would boldly inculcate on his Maker 
the duty of saving infants on the simple ground 
of justice Dr. Foster, Methodist, not a whit 
less bold, would inform his Maker that He was 
bound to save the race of infants by grace; 
while both the TJniversalist doctor and the Ar- 
minian doctor would claim the liberty to call 



86 DEBT DISCHARGED BY GRACE. 

God an infinite tyrant to His face, if He did 
not save infants either by justice or by grace. 

You will not for a moment suppose, my 
brother, that I put you and your brethren on 
a level with a class of religionists who might 
as well take refuge in Deism at once ; for Uni- 
versalism is little better than Deism. But it 
cannot be denied that Universalists have here 
the advantage of Arminians ; for if God could 
not justly leave infants to the consequences of 
Adam's transgression, it is clear as day that the 
Universalist and not the Methodist is right. To 
talk about infants being saved by grace, if jus- 
tice demands their salvation, is really to talk 
nonsense. Who ever thinks of calling the pay- 
ment of an honest debt the conferring of a 
special favor ? Who ever dreams of designat- 
ing the cancelling of an obligation the bestowal 
of a free gift ? And yet the salvation of in- 
fants is represented by Arminians as a heavy 
debt most justly due, which a just God dis- 
charges by grace I 

John Smith. 



ASSERTIONS FOR REASONS. 87 



LETTER XYIL 

Dear Brother : — 

Since I wrote my last letter, the Rev. Mr. 
Jones has preached another sermon on the 
salvation of children dying in infancy. After 
the congregation was dismissed, the following 
conversation took place between two members 
of the Methodist Church: "Well, doctor, did 
not the Calvinists receive a pretty severe hand- 
ling this evening ?" " So they did, madam, but 
it strikes me that brother Jones would have 
done as well had he given us reasons, instead of 
so many loose assertions. Suppose that Cal- 
vinists do, as he says, believe in the damnation 
of infants, I do not see how this relieves the 
difficulties that beset our own System. I must 
own that I am disappointed, for I expected to 
hear a series of calm and dignified arguments to 
remove the objections which Mr. Smith urges 
against the Arminian theory." " Dr. Black- 
stone, don't you think that brother Jones can 
easily answer all the objections which Mr. John 
Smith can bring forward against our doctrines ?" 
" That may be, but it is certain that he did not 



88 NEVER SO CLEAR BEFORE. 

do so this evening. I am not a theologian, but 
Mr. Jones is a theologian, and as he gave out 
word that he would answer all objections brought 
against our views of grace, I supposed that he 
would make good his promise." "What are 
these great objections, doctor ? Pray, tell me. 
Did not brother Jones make it perfectly plain 
that all infants are saved by grace, in opposi- 
tion to Pelagians and Socinians ; and did he 
not make it just as plain, in opposition to the 
Calvinists, that God would be an Almighty 
Tyrant if He did not save infants by grace ? 
Is there any difficulty in all this ? To my mind, 
this subject never was made to appear in so 
clear a light before." " On the contrary, to my 
mind, madam, this subject never appeared so 
dark before. To speak the truth, the theory of 
our church looks like a sheer contradiction, and 
the longer I fix my attention on it, the more 
striking the contradiction appears. Brother 
Jones, quoting from our last Christian Ad- 
vocate, showed the absurdity of the doctrine 
that infants were really involved in ruin for 
Adam's sin ; this being so, with what pro- 
priety can infants be said to be saved by 
grace ? How is it possible that they are saved 
by grace, if they were never in reality lost ? 



STERN TACTS. 89 

What has grace to do with their salvation ? 
And is Mr. Smith far out of the way, when he 
tells us we had better drop the term grace 
altogether, when we speak about the salvation 
of infants ?" Here the conversation was broken 
off. The next day, Dr. Blackstone politely re- 
quested me to state on paper our views of in- 
fant salvation. I did so, and I inclose a copy 
of the letter I sent him. 

John Smith. 



LETTER XVIII. 

Dr. W. C. Blackstone. 

My Dear Sir : — I cheerfully comply with 
your request, and will come at once to the sub- 
ject. Facts and sound theology are never dis- 
cordant. It is a fact, attested by the constant 
experience of every generation, that the human 
soul is from the first in a corrupt and depraved 
state. Without a solitary exception, the entire 
mass of humanity has been penetrated and per- 
meated by the virus of sin. No point, however 
far back, can be reached in the personal history 
9 



90 STERN FACTS. 

of any individual, where the evil did not already 
exist. When moral agency begins, moral de- 
pravity has already begun, and it is, without 
figure, in all that concerns human responsibility 
ubiquitous. It is present with our first words, 
it accompanies our first acts, it taints our first 
desires, it vitiates our first motives. Nor can 
any amount of favorable circumstances, any kind 
or degree of cultivation, any training intellec- 
tual, physical, or religious, avail with the young 
immortal to shake off the dreadful incubus, 
which, like a malignant spirit, fasten sits hold on 
him, and makes a part of himself wherever he 
goes. These are stern facts. To reject them 
can do no possible good ; and, on the other hand, 
wickedly to impugn the righteousness of God is 
as fruitless as the impotent rage of the viper 
biting against a file. 

The Holy Scriptures, when they solemnly de- 
clare that we are by nature dead in trespasses 
and sins, and by nature the children of wrath, 
simply confirm what universal history — the his- 
tory of every nation, ancient and modern, bar- 
barian and civilized ; the history of every family, 
great and small ; the history of every individual, 
noble and common, imperial and servile — teaches 
and has always taught. We might, indeed, be 



MEN NOT CREATED SINNERS. 91 

living in a world where sin and misery were not 
even known by name ; where generation after gen- 
eration of beings like us would be born innocent, 
and holy, and pure ; where, as the infantile facul- 
ties were unfolded, each clear little heart would 
be found a most lovely mirror, reflecting in per- 
fection the image of the blessed Creator, and 
where, in the constant progress of development, 
the affections and motives would be expressed 
by language and actions void of the faintest 
trace of selfishness and sin. It would no doubt 
be very pleasant to live in such a world ; but it 
is not the world to which we belong. We can, 
indeed, by a stretch of the imagination, bring 
before our minds the picture of such a human 
race, but everybody knows that it is not the 
real human race, the race that is actually born, 
that actually lives, moves, and dies on this 
planet. 

But where is the philosophy that is to solve 
the awful mysteries of this theme ? It is all in 
the Bible. Mere human wisdom teaches that 
God created men just as they now are, selfish 
and depraved A theory, which so palpably 
makes God the author of sin, we indignantly 
reject. It is not possible that a race of intelli- 
gent, responsible agents should be created 



92 MEN NOT CREATED SINNERS. 

morally corrupt and unholy. God does not now 
create. Creation, so far as this world is in ques- 
tion, stopped when the words " very good " were 
pronounced over Adam, the father of the human 
family. In those words we had a share ; for 
that incomprehensible Being, to whom a thou- 
sand years are as one day, to whom the future is 
as the preseat, to whom things that are not are 
as things that are, had before Him the aggre- 
gated hosts of the unborn race, with the same 
distinctness as if each and every individual had 
already appeared on the stage of life. We were 
all not only good, but very good. No, my dear- 
sir, men were never created sinners, and as God 
did not create them sinners at first, He did not 
make them sinners afterward. Yet all, without 
one single exception, are sinners by nature, and 
by nature the children of wrath. Nothing can 
be gained by denying the fact. There it stands 
out in bold and terrible relief. Let us go to the 
infallible teachings of inspiration for an expla- 
nation of this most remarkable phenomenon. By 
one man sin entered into the world, and death 
by sin, and so death passed on all men, on in- 
fants as well as adults, for that all have sinned. 
That is, all sinned in Adam ; for not by their 
personal disobedience, but by the disobedience 



INFANTS SAVED BY GRACE. 93 

of one man, all men, infants as well as adults, 
were made sinners. Not by their personal of- 
fenses, but by one offense, judgment came upon 
all men, infants included, to condemnation ; and 
as all men die in Adam, infants, as truly as 
others, die in him. Infants were really lost, 
for the blessed Saviour says of little ones, that 
He came to seek and save them as lost. If they 
were not lost, they could have no part in the 
Saviour's work of redemption, and heaven 
would furnish the anomalous spectacle of one- 
half of the church saved by Christ, and the 
other half without Christ. But if infants are 
saved by grace, then not only were they lost, 
they were justly lost, for if they had not been 
justly lost, they could not possibly be saved by 
grace. To suppose that the Son of God should 
lay down His life for innocent, pure, and holy 
infants, or for infants not morally corrupt and 
depraved in nature, would involve the wickedness 
of charging that all-wise Being with an exhibi- 
tion of folly and trifling without a parallel in 
the annals of the universe. If one infant only 
is saved, it is saved by grace. If ten infants 
are saved, they are saved by grace. If a thou- 
sand, if a million, if all infants are saved — and 
we have no reason to doubt this — then all are 
9* 



94 INFANTS SAVED BY GRACE. 

saved by grace. Thus, sir, you will see that 
our doctrine of infant salvation is consistent 
with itself, is consistent with sound reason, and 
is consistent with the teachings of the Sacred 
Scriptures. Contrast with this, if you please, 
the Arminian view of this subject. According 
to Arminianisni, infants were lost and they were 
not lost. They were not in reality lost — for 
justice would forbid it — and yet they are saved by 
grace. But, on the other hand, infants were also 
lost, nominally by Adam's transgression, but 
really by the atonement of Christ. They were 
lost in consequence of Christ's atonement for 
two reasons : first, because there would have 
been no infants ; and, secondly, even if there had 
been infants, it would have been an act of in- 
finite tyranny to expose them to loss on Adam's 
account ; for how, asks the Rev. Dr. Foster, 
could they be to blame for that over which they 
had no more control than the Angel Gabriel? 
Infants are thus, on the Arminian plan, saved by 
grace and they are not saved by grace. They 
are saved by grace because Christ died for them, 
but if He had not died, they would have been 
saved at any rate. Thus you see, sir, that Ar- 
minianisni is inconsistent with itself, is inconsist- 
ent with sound reason, and is inconsistent with 



EXTRACT FROM A SERMON. 95 

the teachings of the word of God. It gives me 
no pleasure to say so, but if ever there was a 
self-contradiction, open, barefaced, and absurd, 
the Methodist Arminian doctrine of infant sal- 
vation is just such a contradiction. 
Yours, very truly, 

John Smith. 

P. S. — I take the liberty to furnish an extract 
from a sermon which I delivered some time ago. 
It will explain itself. 

The bodies of our little ones, snatched by the 
rude hand of the destroyer from our affection- 
ate embrace, we may consign to their mother 
earth, in full assurance of faith that the disen- 
thralled immortals, regenerated and sanctified 
by the Holy Ghost, have gone to seek their 
kindred in the skies. Death is a vanquished 
foe. In the awful struggle with the Prince of 
Life, the monster lost its sting ; and it is written 
in the volume of the deep decrees of God, that the 
last enemy of the church that is to be destroyed 
is Death itself. "We ought then neither to mur- 
mur nor repine. We ought not even to wish 
them back. They are transferred to the Para- 
dise above, and it would be cruel to have them 
recross the deep waters of Jordan in order to 
share our toils, to be exposed to our dangers 



96 



and temptations, and to be made partakers of 
our sufferings and trials. The dark and silent 
grave yawning to receive its coveted possession 
is indeed repulsive to nature, but the infantile 
tomb is lit up with the hopes which the Mighty 
Conqueror Himself, the Resurrection and the 
Life, has inspired. In that bright world to 
which they have passed, no fears shall disturb 
their calm repose, no disappointments cross their 
path, no vexations mar their peace. The only 
changes which they will undergo will be to pass 
from glory to glory, and from one height of ex- 
cellence and bliss to another still more exalted.. 
Were such little ones permitted to break the 
mysterious silence of eternity, how often might 
they not be heard to whisper words of endear- 
ment and encouragement not unlike these : 
" Father ! Mother ! weep not for us. We have 
been called froni your family, to join the higher 
and holier family of our Father in heaven. 
We would not, oh ! no, we would not if we 
could, forsake these celestial abodes to return 
to your habitations of clay. Weep not for us, 
weep for yourselves and for perishing sinners 
around you. Oh ! could your eyes behold what 
we behold, could your ears hear what we hear — 
such countenances radiant with love, such majes- 



THE DOCTRINE OF ELECTION. 9? 

tic forms, such an atmosphere, such sights, such 
glory, such kind greetings, such hymns of praise, 
such majesty and love in the ever adorable Re- 
deemer, so gracious a reception by the eternal 
Father ! But it is not for you to know these 
things now. Live by faith on the Son of God, 
crucify the flesh, overcome the world, fight the 
good fight of faith, fight on, and when the vic- 
tory is won, we will be the first to welcome you 
to the joys of our Father's house above." 

J. S. 



LETTER XIX. 

i 
Dear Brother : — 

I now come to a subject the very mention of 
which, most unfortunately, is apt to stir the 
prejudice, and sometimes the indignation, of 
Arminians — the doctrine of election. There 
are, it is to be feared, large classes of pro- 
fessed Christians who, if they could -have their 
own way, would quietly drop such words as 
elect, election, predestinate, as unbefitting the 
religion of a rational and enlightened age. In 
the minds of not a few, the name of Calvin 



98 ONE THING CERTAIN. 

is associated with these doctrines, just as if John 
Calvin had been the originator of them ; while 
these doctrines themselves, deep and glorious 
as the wisdom and love of God, are held in 
ignorant contempt. John Calvin was un- 
doubtedly a great man, a very great man ; 
but we believe he had just as much to do with 
putting the sun and moon in the sky as with 
the authorship of these sublime truths. If the 
Genevan theologian and philosopher had never 
opened his eyes on this planet, it is altogether 
likely that the sun would shine by day, and the 
moon give her light by night ; and it is just as 
likely that the inspired volume would declare 
that God has mercy on whom He will have 
mercy, and hardens whom He wilUharden. One 
thing at least is certain. These obnoxious ex- 
pressions would not be found in the New Testa- 
ment, if the sacred writers had designed to in- 
culcate the sentiments of modern Arminianism. 
No Arminian ever willingly uses these expres- 
sions. No Methodist minister, unless it is to 
do battle, ever preaches from texts where such 
terms occur. Where would the eighth and 
ninth chapters of Romans be, if the sentiments 
of John Wesley had been the sentiments of the 
Apostle Paul ? What Arminian, of ancient or 



IS TAUGHT OR IS NOT TAUGHT. 99 

modern times, could possibly have written the 
thirteenth chapter of Revelation ? Imagine, if 
you can, my brother, an honest, straightfor- 
ward discourse by Archbishop Hughes, from 
the text, " In vain do they worship me, teaching 
for doctrines the commandments of men ;" or 
one by the Rev. M. D. Conway, from the text, 
11 For the time will come, when they will not 
endure sound doctrine, but after their own lusts 
shall they heap to themselves teachers having 
itching ears." Now just so impossible it is to 
imagine an honest, straightforward discourse 
by a Methodist Episcopal preacher from the 
text, " Thou hast given Him power over all 
flesh, that He should give eternal life to as 
many as Thou hast given Him;" or from the 
text, "All that the Father giveth me shall come 
to me." 

The doctrine of personal election to holiness 
and eternal life is taught in the Scriptures, or 
it is not taught there. If the Bible does not 
teach this doctrine, we shall find nothing said 
about it, or we shall find it brought forward 
only to be condemned. The Romish dogmas 
of transubstantiation and purgatory are not 
anywhere mentioned in the New Testament, 
therefore we conclude that there is no such a 



100 DR. FOSTER ON ELECTION. 

place as purgatory, and no such a thing as 
transubstantiation. In like manner, if the 
words elect, election, elected, chosen, predesti- 
nated, are not found applied to individuals in 
the Scriptures, then Arminians are right, and 
the doctrine of election is false. Now what are 
the facts ? Are these terms, like transubstantia- 
tion and purgatory, nowhere mentioned in the 
Sacred Oracles ? You know that they occur 
again and again. 

But this doctrine might be brought forward 
only to have the seal of condemnation affixed 
to it. In that case, these expressions would 
indeed be employed, but they would be named 
only with abhorrence. It is well known that 
there is a long list of writers, Pelagian and 
Arminian, by whom the doctrine of personal 
election to holiness and eternal life has been 
assailed in language the most indignant and 
bitter. In that Methodist book, " Objections 
to Calvinism," the changes are rung on pre- 
ordain, predestinate, elect, election; but all the 
English, good and bad, at the author's com- 
mand, seems inadequate to convey a full idea 
of the loathing and hatred of his soul for these 
terms. Let me give you a few specimens. 

"It," the doctrine of election, "renders the 



DR. FOSTER ON ELECTION. 101 

conclusion unavoidable that God is the re- 
sponsible author of sin — author in the sense of 
orginator and cause."* "All, therefore, who 
hold to the unconditional election of a part of 
mankind to eternal life, must, to be consistent 
with themselves, take into their creed the horri- 
ble doctrine of reprobation. They must be- 
lieve that, in the ages of eternity, God de- 
termined to create men and angels for the 
express purpose to damn them eternally ! that 
He determined to introduce sin, and harden 
them in it that they might be fit subjects of 
His wrath ! that for doing as they are impelled 
to do, by the irresistible decree of Jehovah, 
they must lie down forever under the scalding 
vials of His vengeance in the pit of hell ! To 
state this doctrine in its true character, is 
enough to chill one's blood, and we are drawn 
by all that is rational in us to turn away from 
such a God with horror, as from the presence of 
an Almighty Tyrant, "f Thus speaks the Rev. 
Dr. R. S. Foster, one of the living oracles of 
the Methodist Episcopal Church. 

Now, I would ask, does the Bible ever use 

* Objections to Calvinism, p. 103. 
f Ibid. p. 85. 

10 



102 DIFFERENT STYLE OF THE BIBLE. 

language such as this ? Is this in the style of 
Paul or Peter? Does the Apostle say, " God 
did not predestinate His people to the adoption 
of children ; that He did not choose His people 
in Christ, before the foundation of the world, 
that they should be holy ; that He has not 
mercy on whom He will have mercy, but is 
bound to show mercy to all alike ; that He 
hardeneth not whom He will harden, since this 
would make Him an infinite Tyrant?" Does 
the Saviour say, " I thank Thee, Father, 
Lord of heaven and earth, that Thou hast not 
hid these things from the wise and prudent ; 
this cOuld never seem good in Thy sight, since 
it would be the height of injustice to hide these 
things from any human being ?" This would 
no doubt be genuine Arminianism; but does 
the Bible ever employ such language ? I ask 
again, is this in the style of the Holy Scrip- 
tures ? These questions carry with them their 
own answer. The fact is, the Bible not only 
nowhere speaks a word against the doctrine of 
election, but its whole teaching is in the most 
decided terms in its favor. 

John Smith. 



BELIEVERS CHOSEN IN CHRIST. 103 



LETTER XX. 

Dear Brother : — 

The Apostle Paul opens one of his noble 
Epistles, by blessing God, the Father, for choos- 
ing believers in Christ before the foundation of 
the world, and for predestinating them to the 
adoption of children, according to the good 
pleasure of His will. The text stands in the 
first chapter of Ephesians, the fourth and fifth 
verses It is not a cold logical formula, it is 
the language of rapturous praise — the lively ex- 
pression of a soul burdened with a sense of the 
unspeakable majesty and mercy of God. What 
follows is reason of the highest order, reason 
penetrated and glowing with the fire of holy 
passion. But this noble text, remarkable for 
its stirring eloquence, is one which there is 
ground to believe is seldom or never handled in 
Arminian pulpits for simple edification. Of the 
thousands of Methodist churches in America, 
where is one that ever joins in praising God be- 
cause He chose them in Christ before the foun- 
dation of the world ? Where is one that is ever 
taught to do this ? Where is one that could be 



104 A PUZZLE. 

persuaded to do this ? Do not rather such ex- 
pressions awaken emotions just the opposite 
of those that were kindled in the breast of the 
inspired Apostle ? To a candid Arminian, the 
words predestinated, chosen, elect, as they are 
met with in the Scriptures, must, it seems to 
me, be a perfect puzzle. He himself never, ex- 
cept in a diluted sense, employs such terms in 
praise, never employs them in prayer, never 
employs them to edify his own soul, or the 
souls of his brethren. He has in truth no use for 
them, and there is consequently no proper place 
for them in his system of theology. He sees 
and feels this. These terms are to him what 
the words hell, hell-fire, everlasting punishment 
are to the Universalist. He would most will- 
ingly dispense with them. And yet there they 
stand in the Bible. They mean something, or 
they would not be found there ; but nothing 
that wit or ingenuity can do, is omitted to ex- 
plain away their meaning, which is in itself so 
very plain and striking. 

In the political world, the word election is in 
common use, and no grown-up person ever falls 
into a mistake as to its proper signification. 
And but for the inveterate force of prejudice, 
no grown-up person would ever fall into a mis- 



ELECTION. 105 

take as to its meaning in the Bible. Election 
among men implies : 

First. That there are certain persons chosen. 
If nobody is chosen, we say there is no election. 

Secondly. That there is some definite end or 
object for which they are chosen ; thus such 
and such men are elected to the State Legisla- 
ture, others to be members of Congress, and 
so on. 

Thirdly. That there are qualified electors who 
make the choice, who choose, who elect. 

Fourthly. That there are certain reasons 
which influence the majority of the electors in 
choosing the persons that are elected. 

Fifthly. That there is a certain time when the 
choice is made ; thus on such a day of such a 
month an election takes place. 

Now what is so plain and easy to understand 
in political matters, is just as plain and simple 
in matters of religion. 1st. There are certain 
persons chosen. Paul, speaking of himself and 
the Ephesian Christians, says : He hath chosen 
us in Christ. But all true believers were chosen 
in the same way, and are in the Scriptures 
styled the elect, the election. " If it were 
possible they would deceive the very elect." 
" Shall not God avenge His own elect ?" 
10* 



1 06 ELECTION. 

" Who shall lay anything to the charge of 
God's elect V 1 " Put on, therefore, as the elect 
of God, bowels of mercies." "The election 
hath obtained it, the rest were blinded." At 
the end of the world a certain number, no doubt 
a very large number of the human race, will be 
received into heaven, to be forever glorified 
with the Saviour. " But who He glorified He 
also justified, and whom He justified them He 
also called, and whom He called them He also 
predestinated to be conformed to the image 
of His Son." 

2d. There was a definite end to which they 
were chosen ; namely, to be holy and blameless 
in love. To God mankind appeared in prospect, 
what they now are in fact, a race of rebels, all, 
to an individual, disposed to despise His com- 
mands and to resist His authority, and all most 
justly exposed to endless wrath. From this 
mass of moral corruption and guilt, hosts, in- 
numerable as the sands on the shores of the sea, 
were predestinated to the adoption of children, 
and chosen to be holy and without blame before 
Him in love. 

3d. There was a certain period when the 
election took place. It was not in time, but 
before time began ; not after, but before the 



ELECTOR. 107 

foundation of the world. It was in that awful 
period of the past to which the Saviour refers 
in that remarkable prayer, " Glorify Thou me, 
O Father, with the glory which I had with 
Thee before the world was;" infinite ages 
before the first ray of created light had pene- 
trated the darkness of chaos, or the first anthem 
of praise had broken the silence of eternity. 

4th. There was one Elector, and but one, 
God Himself. Not a single passage in the 
Bible teaches that Christians elected them- 
selves. How could they choose themselves 
before the foundation of the world ? That is 
not all. God only has the right to choose, and 
He claims this right. " I will have mercy on 
whom I will have mercy, and I will have com- 
passion on whom I will have compassion." 
God only has the power to choose. " Hath 
not the potter power over the clay, of the same 
lump to make one vessel unto honor and an- 
other to dishonor ?" To choose sinners in 
Christ implies also the power to raise them 
from the dead, both in a spiritual and natural 
sense, and this power resides exclusively in the 
arm of Omnipotence. Christians are styled 
God's elect, and they would not be so denom- 
inated if any but God had elected them. 



108 REASONS. 

5th. There were certain reasons which in- 
fluenced the Divine Mind in this election. 
These .reasons are worthy of the wisdom and 
greatness of Jehovah, but to us it is not given 
to know them. It does not comport with the 
majesty of the Eternal Father to descend to an 
explanation of His conduct. His ways are not, 
and cannot be our ways, and His thoughts are 
not, and cannot be our thoughts. It is w enough 
for us to know that such was His sovereign 
will and pleasure. The argument of all others 
the most powerful to sway the judgment and to 
command the obedience of all the principalities 
and powers of heaven is this — such is the will 
of God. Here all argument stops. Beyond 
this Gabriel does not seek to go. Now what 
satisfies the. capacious mind> of an archangel, 
ought surely to convince the narrow under- 
standing of a creature so recent and so feeble 
as man. We can ascend even beyond this. A 
greater by far than an archangel, Jesus Christ 
Himself, finds rest in this last and highest of all 
reasons: " Even so, Father, for so it seemeth 
good in Thy sight," so is Thy righteous will 
and pleasure. 

Permit me, in conclusion, to present the 
Apostle's argument in this simple form. 



A SIMPLE STATEMENT. 109 

There are persons chosen. Who are they ? 
All Christians, the elect. 

There was a certain definite end to which 
they were chosen. What was it ? To become 
holy and blameless in love. 

There was a certain period in which the 
election took place. When was it ? Before 
the foundation of the world. 

There was one qualified Elector, and but one. 
Who was it ? God the Father. 

There were certain reasons, wise and just, 
that influenced the infinite mind of the Father, 
in this election. What were they ? These rea- 
sons He does not see fit to give, nor does He 
condescend to explain the motives from which 
He is pleased to act. He predestinated us to 
the adoption of children by Jesus Christ to 
Himself, according to the good pleasure of His 
will. Here our inquiries and our investigations 
must stop. 

John Smith. 



110 THE SOVEREIGNTY OF GOD HATED. 



LETTER XXL 

Dear Brother : — 

The sovereignty of God has, in all ages, 
roused the opposition of the human heart. Wit, 
argument, eloquence, bombast, satire, burlesque, 
have all been employed in turn, and employed 
till their force was spent against this clearly re- 
vealed truth. Nor is this opposition mere show. 
It springs from no simulated enmity ; but from 
enmity that comes from the bottom of the soul. 
Absolute sovereignty is, with these men, but 
another name for absolute tyranny; and that 
which calls forth the Alleluias of heaven, only 
extorts their denunciations and curses. They 
place confidence in their Maker, only so far as 
it is clear to their understandings that He is 
doing right, or, at least, that He is not doing 
wrong. They cannot, so to speak, trust Him 
out of sight. They must see to it that He does 
not overstep the just bounds of His authority, 
and trample on the rights of sinners.- It will 
not do to tell them that God, in bestowing mercy 
on whom He will have mercy, and in hardening 
whom He will harden, is actuated by reasons in- 



ARMINIAN CLAIMS. Ill 

finitely wise and infinitely good. They must 
see these reasons for themselves. It is not suffi- 
cient for Him to say, "Be still, and know that I 
am God; know that though I give no reasons 
for my conduct, what I do is always done in 
perfect righteousness and perfect justice. " They 
will not be still, but plainly inform Him that 
they do not concede to Him the prerogative to 
show mercy to one rebel and not to another. 
Why should He have mercy on some and not on 
others? Why should He withhold mercy from 
any sinner? Would not this involve Him in 
criminal partiality and gross injustice ? Are not 
all men His creatures ? Did they have a hand in 
making themselves what they are, depraved and 
corrupt ? Have not all sinners a claim, a just 
and equal claim, to the Divine favor ? Is not 
God bound to respect this claim ? Whence then 
has He the right to leave a sinner to himself or 
to suffer him to follow the devices of his de- 
praved imagination ? Might not such a sinner 
turn on his Maker, and, clearing himself of all 
blame, lay all his sins and crimes to his Maker's 
charge ? Nay, might not such a sinner, deeply 
sensible of the injury inflicted on him, his rights 
disregarded, his just claims set at naught, ascend 
the throne of judgment himself, and summon 



112 ARMINIAN CLAIMS. 

the Almighty to the tribunal of justice ? ''Thou, 

Lord, didst have mercy on other sinners but 
not on me. To others Thou gavest grace to re- 
pent and believe, to me Thou gavest no grace. 
Why didst Thou thus ? True, I was a sinner ; 

1 did trample on Thy authority ; I did hate Thy 
holy character ; my carnal mind was at enmity 
with Thee ; I did reject the offers of salvation ; 
I did hold the Saviour in utter contempt ; but 
could I be to blame for this ? Was not my nature 
depraved ? Was it in my power to love Thee ? 
Why didst Thou not bestow on me a sufficient 
measure of grace? Why didst Thou not, by 
Thy almighty power, overcome the rebellion and 
enmity of my heart ? If Thou hast mercy on 
whom Thou wilt have mercy, and hardenest 
whom Thou wilt harden, why then dost Thou 
find fault, for who hath resisted Thy will ? I do 
therefore, Lord, protest against such criminal 
partiality, and I solemnly appeal from Thee to the 
conscience of the universe I" Do you say, my 
brother, that I have been drawing a mere pic- 
ture of the fancy ; that no person in his sober 
senses would venture to adopt such a style of 
reasoning, or to address the Divine Majesty in 
terms so fraught with insolence ? I reply, this is 
no sketch of the fancy. Would that it were so. 



ARMINIAN OBJECTIONS. 113 

It is, I grieve to say it, but too faithful a de- 
scription of fact. Are you disposed to call this 
in question ? Is proof required ? Do you demand 
of me to point out the men who take it on them- 
selves to claim for rebels a share, and for all 
rebels an equal share of grace; and who pub- 
licly threaten, if grace were denied to a single 
sinner, to stigmatize Jehovah in the face of His 
creation, as an Infinite and Almighty Tyrant ? 
Do you ask why I bring forward objections 
urged only by persons who know neither the 
meaning of sin on the one hand, nor of grace on 
the other hand ; by persons who make light of 
God's immaculate purity, and turn the dreadful 
sanctions of His holy law into jest; objections 
urged by Socinians, by Universalists, by Ra- 
tionalists ? I answer that they are also the ob- 
jections, the very objections, used by Methodist 
Arminians. Do you deny this ? Do you pro- 
nounce such an accusation false ? Do you call 
on me to name any Methodist preachers or 
writers, who have the assurance to bring for- 
ward objections so supremely wicked and absurd, 
or who employ language so bold and irreverent, 
that it absolutely borders on blasphemy ? Stand 
forth, Doctor Foster, author of " Objections to 
11 



114 DR. FOSTER TAKES THE DEVIL'S PART. 

Calvinism," and thou, Bishop Simpson, his in- 
clorser; ye are the men ! 

Hear, now, what the Rev. Dr. Foster has to 
say : " I object to it (the doctrine of Election) 
as involving the Divine Being in the grossest in- 
justice, and criminal partiality.* It represents 
God as worse than the Devil can be — as more 
false, more cruel, and unjust. More false, be- 
cause the Devil, liar as he is, hath never said, 
'He willeth all men to be saved ;' more unjust, 
because the Devil cannot, if he would, be guilty 
of such injustice as you ascribe to God, when 
you say that God condemns millions of souls to 
everlasting fire, for continuing in sin, which, for 
the grace that He will not give them they cannot 
avoid. Human nature is depraved, and un- 
less changed by the grace of God, it must sin 
on, must sin ever. But if he must sin, and can- 
not avoid it, the man cannot be to blame for it, 
can he ? Let it not be said he brought the dis- 
ability on himself. If this were so, it would 
relieve the case. But this is not the fact. His 
disability came with him into the world ; it was 
communicated as a part of his existence ; it was 

* Dr. Foster quotes and indorses these sentiments of 
Mr. Wesley. 



THE SINNER WITHOUT ANY GUILT. 115 

his very essential nature. His first parent may 
be to blame, bat surely he cannot be responsible. 
Let him sin, no being in the universe can cen- 
sure him, he is not to blame. Not only is he 
not to blame for his sins, (if God withhold grace,) 
but he cannot be required to do right — he is 
under no obligation to do right. Nay, I go 
a step further, and say that the actual sins of 
reprobates forms no juster ground of their dam- 
nation than their natural corruption, for they 
were brought into existence with a corrupt na- 
ture, for which it was never possible for them 
to free themselves ; which they had no consent 
in bringing on themselves, and with it their ac- 
tual sins were absolutely unavoidable, and so 
could no more constitute a just ground of con- 
demnation, than would their inherited deprav- 
ity. It renders the conclusion unavoidable, 
that the sinner is absolutely damned, not only 
without the possibility of salvation, but with- 
out any fault of his whatever. They are called 
to return to God, to repent, to believe in Christ, 
to a holy life — no one of which calls could they 
possibly obey ; and yet, for not obeying, every 
time they refuse, their damnation is increased. 
Is not this awful, frightful ! Dreadful ! dread- 
ful ! dreadful ! Thou Great Spirit of the heavens, 
art thou such a monster as this ?" 



116 BISHOP SIMPSON'S INDORSEMENT. 

These quotations, my brother, will, I trust, 
satisfy, perhaps they will more than satisfy your 
demands. They are all taken, and many more, 
couched in similar language, breathing a similar 
spirit, and pervaded by a logic equally conclu- 
sive, might be taken out of Foster's " Objections 
to Calvinism." " This work," says Bishop 
Simpson, of your church, "has been well exe^ 
cuted. The objections are distinctly and ex- 
plicitely stated, and the intelligent reader will, 
we think, be fully convinced they are well sus- 
tained. We commend the volume as one of 
great merit."* 

In my last letter, I summed up the arguments 
of the Apostle Paul in favor of the doctrine of 
Election ; I will now, by way of contrast, sum 
up the Rev. Dr. Foster's arguments against this 
doctrine, and Dr. Foster's arguments are also 
the arguments of Bishop Simpson : — 

All men are naturally depraved. No man is 
to blame for natural depravity. No man, un- 
less a measure of grace is bestowed, is respons- 
ible for actual sin, any more than for hereditary 
depravity. God is obligated to bestow grace 
on all men. He is not at liberty to have mercy 

* Bishop Simpson's Introduction to Objections to 
Calvinism. 



CLAIM OR NO CLAIM. 117 

on one sinner, and to pass by another. Justice 
requires an equal distribution of grace. If in 
any instance God should refuse to bestow grace, 
He would be criminally partial and grossly un- 
just. If God should undertake to call such a 
sinner to account, the sinner might lay the whole 
guilt of all his sins and crimes to the charge of 
his Maker, and before the universe proclaim his 
Maker a monster and tyrant ! 

John Smith. 



LETTER XXII. 

Dear Brother : — 

The whole controversy on the doctrine of 
election hinges on this — claim or uo claim. If 
mankind, as sinners, can lay claim to the mercy 
of God, it is a waste of time to argue the ques- 
tion ; Arminians in that case are right, and the 
doctrine of election is false. If such a title is 
inherent in sinners, we Calvinists are in a griev- 
ous error, and deserve all the abuse we are 
accustomed to receive. But have sinners such 
a claim ? Is such a title inherent in rebels and 
traitors ? Must God, in order to be just, show 
11* 



118 CLAIM OR NO CLAIM. 

mercy to His enemies ? Who would dare to 
answer these questions in the affirmative ? And 
yet it is a remarkable fact that this is always 
taken for granted by Arminians, whenever they 
make their attacks on the doctrine of election. 

Our system of theology knows nothing of 
claim on God — indeed we should be ashamed 
of it if it did. An error so serious can spring 
only from loose views of the nature of sin. I 
do not, in saying so, desire to intimate that we 
take in a complete and perfect view of this most 
terrific evil. We do not. The human faculties 
are too weak, the area of human vision is too 
contracted, the theater on which sin displays its 
tragic career is too small, the years of time are 
too few, to furnish an opportunity to master 
even in thought this frightful theme. It would 
require an imagination vigorous enough to soar 
with unfaltering pinions to the inaccessible 
heights of the eternal throne, an understand- 
ing powerful enough to investigate and com- 
prehend the full sense of infinite goodness, in- 
finite holiness, infinite justice, and an eye keen 
enough to pierce the abysses of guilt and the 
abysses of woe, into which a rebel creature 
plunges in its audacious attempts to set at de- 
fiance the authority the blessed Creator. But 



THE AWAKENED SINNER'S VIEW. 119 

where is a created being possessed of powers 
so capacious to be found ? Not on earth. Not 
in heaven, for even heaven itself could not, 
from the most gifted of her gifted sons, furnish 
abilities adequate to such a task. 

But while, in the absolute sense, the dreadful 
import of sin lies not within the reach of a 
creature's mind, through the operations of the 
Holy Spirit, sinners themselves are enabled to 
understand that sin is the direst of evils, that 
it is in truth the only real evil. The conscience, 
enlightened and awakened, threatens in a voice 
of thunder, and the sinner trembles before a 
holy God. Propose to such a man, prostrate 
before the footstool of mercy, to address his 
Maker in the terms which Arminians employ in 
assailing the doctrine of the Divine sovereignty, 
and his whole soul would revolt at such daring 
impiety. He would sooner consent to have a 
millstone tied to his neck and to be cast into 
the depths of the sea. Why, then, we may de- 
mand, do your writers and preachers make use 
of language in argument which no sane man 
would ever venture to employ in prayer ? And 
what must be the worth of objections which, 
though they may impose on the unthinking 
multitude, the instant they are converted into 
the language of prayer become blasphemy ? 



120 GRACE AND JOHN WESLEY. 

I have, in some of my letters, quoted largely 
from Foster's " Objections to Calvinism," to 
show that the fundamental idea of Arnrinianism, 
as far as it departs from the teachings of the 
Bible, is that sinners as sinners, and because 
they are sinners, have a just and legal claim on 
the mercy and grace of God. I will now quote 
from a greater than Mr. Foster, the Rev. John 
Wesley, to prove the same thing. This is Mr. 
Wesley's language : "Are you sure that God 
might justly pass by all men ? I deny it. That 
God might justly, for my unfaithfulness to His 
grace, have given me up long ago, I grant ; but 
this concession supposes me to have had grace."* 
In other words, God had not the right to cast 
off John Wesley, simply as a fallen sinner. 
John Wesley, to be held responsible for wrong- 
doing, must have grace. John Wesley, without 
grace conferred, might confidently stand forth 
and challenge the right of the Almighty to 
bring him to punishment. John Wesley, with 
grace conferred, yields the point, and is ready 
to acknowledge that for unfaithfulness to grace 
God has a hold on him, and might even long 
ago have given him over. This he is willing 

* Predestination Calmly Considered, pp. 25, 26. 



PAUL FOR ONCE AN ARMINIAN. 121 

to concede ; but he desires it to be expressly 
understood that this concession is made only 
on condition that grace be previously bestowed. 

It may not be unprofitable to ask, how would 
such language sound in the mouth of the 
Apostle Paul ? Imagine such an anomaly, if 
you can, and for once let Paul be an Arminian. 
" By grace are ye saved, through faith and that 
not of yourselves ; it is the gift of God. God 
could not, however, in justice, have passed by 
all men. Where is it written that He might 
do this ? I cannot find it in the word of God. 
Therefore I reject it as a bold, precarious as- 
sertion, utterly unsupported by Holy Scripture. 
Does any one say to you, my brethren — (Paul 
still speaking) — you know in your own con- 
science that God might justly have passed you 
by and left you to perish in your guilt ? I 
deny it. That God might justly, for your un- 
faithfulness to His grace, have given you up 
long ago, I grant ; but this concession sup- 
poses you to have had grace."* 

Now of all difficult tasks, you would find none 
more difficult than to believe that the great 

* Read, I beg you, the above language in Wesley's 
Predestination Calmly Considered, pp. 25, 26. 



122 ARMINIAN GRACE. 

Apostle of the Gentiles could have given utter- 
ance to sentiments like these ; the very senti- 
ments of John Wesley, the founder of Arminian 
Methodism. 

To be plain with you, my brother, you be- 
lieve in grace and you do not believe in grace. 
You call that grace in one breath, what, in the 
next breath, you claim that God was in justice 
bound to do. But how justice was bound to do 
the work of grace, we Calvinists cannot under- 
stand. Our belief, so often and so freely ex- 
pressed, is that a race of rebels deserve no 
mercy. Arminians and Pelagians join hand in 
hand to oppose this doctrine. All the hard 
names in the dictionary, and some words not 
found there, are most liberally applied to us, be- 
cause we confidently assert that sinners have not 
a claim on the Divine mercy. We contend that 
grace and obligation are not synonymous terms. 
In the Scriptures grace is pure, and like virgin 
gold without alloy. The grace of Arminianism, 
on the other hand, is a sort of compound of 
real grace and real debt ; and the strange med- 
ley is set forth and described under the cap- 
tivating title of free grace. For instance, you 
all hold the sentiment that God of His mercy 
sent His Son into the world to die for sinners — 



ARMINIAN GRACE. 123 

this is grace. But you do not stick to this. 
You also maintain that if He had not sent His 
Son into the world to save sinners, He would 
have been unjust — this is debt. That is, God 
is infinitely good to our fallen race in conferring 
grace, but He would be infinitely unjust to our 
fallen race did He not confer grace. And this 
is what you call, by way of eminence, free 
grace. 

The substance of Arminian theology, con- 
centrated and condensed, may be comprehended 
in this brief saying, namely, sinners, one and 
all, have a just claim to a certain measure of 
grace. Give up this claim, and where would 
your brethren commence their assaults on the 
doctrine of election and on the Sovereignty of 
God ? Give up this claim, and what would be- 
come of Dr. Foster's " Objections to Calvinism V 
Give up this claim, and what, my dear brother 
Peter, would become of you at your next An- 
nual Conference ? Give up this claim, and 
Arminianism gives up the ghost. 

John Smith. 



124 CONSUMMATE HARMONY. 



LETTER XXIII. 



Dear Brother: — 

Never was the doctrine of election, coupled 
with a general offer of salvation, stated more 
clearly than in this charming sentence : "All 
that the Father giveth me shall come unto me, 
and him that cometh unto me I will in nowise 
cast out." The elegant simplicity of this pas- 
sage is surpassed only by the depth and compre- 
hensiveness of its meaning. The Divine elec- 
tion and human freedom are here brought out, 
not in opposition to each other, not by way of 
contrast, but side by side, in consummate har- 
mony. The offer of salvation takes in the widest 
scope. It is not to the Jew only, nor only to 
the G-entile ; it is not merely to the learned and 
intelligent, nor merely to the unlettered and the 
ignorant ; it is not simply to the great and pow- 
erful, nor simply to the poor and lowly ; it is to 
the Jew and the Gentile, to the learned and the 
unlearned, to the rich and the poor, to the power- 
ful and the weak, that the gracious offer is made 
in like terms of condescension and encourage- 
ment. Nor was the promise restricted to sinners 



WHO RECEIVE CHRIST, 125 

of His own time ; it comes down, blessed be His 
name, in all its fullness and freshness to the sin- 
ners of this generation. He turns not away 
from any broken-hearted penitent. He never 
says, "You are too insignificant, you are too 
degraded, your sins are too numerous, your 
guilt is too great." Were death and hell to- 
day to give up the dead that are in them, the 
annals of perdition could not furnish a solitary 
instance of a sinner cast out who had sincerely 
applied to Him for salvation. 

But while this is a glorious truth, it is equally 
true that, unless accompanied by a special in- 
fluence from above, this most remarkable offer is 
never accepted, is never deemed worth accept- 
ing. The preaching of the cross is, to them 
that perish, foolishness ; it is only to those who 
are the called, according to the Divine purpose, 
that it becomes the power of God unto salva- 
tion. Only those receive the Saviour, only 
those really believe in His name, who are born 
not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor 
of the will of man, but of God. All others 
invariably reject Him. 

What proportion of the human race, it may 
be asked, will eventually be saved from sin and 
everlasting death ? Those who come to the 
12 



126 HOW MANY ARE SAVED? 

Lord Jesus Christ for pardon and life. Who 
are they that come to Him for pardon and life ? 
Those whom the Father gave to the Son. Will 
any of these fail to come ? Not one. "All that 
the Father giveth to me," says the Saviour, 
"shall come to me." Will any others come? 
None. "No man," says the same Divine Per- 
sonage, "can come unto me except it were given 
to him of my Father." Why cannot such a sin- 
ner come ? Does God hinder him from coming ? 
God forbid. Why then can he not come ? Be- 
cause he will not. Suppose he should will to 
come, would he be saved ? Certainly. Would 
not this involve a contradiction ? Not in the 
least. The promise runs thus : " Him that 
cometh to me, I will in nowise cast out." But 
can the sinner come to Christ, can he ever be 
made willing to come, unless the Father draw 
him? No. "No man can come unto me ex- 
cept my Father draw him." But if none can 
come to the Saviour but those who are drawn 
by the Father, is any sinner to blame for not 
coming ? Undoubtedly. Why should he not be 
to blame, when the whole difficulty lies, not in 
God," but in himself, lies in the fearful wickedness 
of his rebellious soul ? The carnal mind is en- 
mity against God, is not subject to the law of 



A MISERABLE EXCUSE. 127 

God, neither can it be. You might as well ask, 
is the carnal mind to blame because it cannot 
be subject to the law of God ? They that are in 
the flesh, that is, they that are not born of the 
Spirit, cannot please God. You might as well 
ask, are they to blame for being in the flesh? 
Are they to blame if they cannot please God ? 
There is a class of persons described as having 
eyes full of adultery, and that cannot cease from 
sin. You might as well ask are they to blame 
if they cannot cease from sin ? The Devil hates 
his Maker with a perfect hatred. You might 
as well ask is the Devil to blame for not loving 
God, since his hatred is so intense that he can- 
not love Him? You see the force of all these 
objections. If sinners were anxious to make 
their way to the Saviour, and it was God that 
kept them back, and hindered them from coming 
to Him, it would, indeed, be a very different 
matter. But it is all the other way. They will 
not be saved. Such is their stubbornness, such 
is the deep-seated enmity of their hearts to God, 
they will not come to Christ for salvation. Does 
justice require that sinners be forced to fly for 
refuge to the Redeemer, in opposition to their 
own deliberate and determined choice ? 

But, you may ask, is it not the tendency of 



128 A MAN IN REAL EARNEST. 

such a doctrine to fill the soul with discourage- 
ment ? Why should it have such a tendency ? 
Does not the Lord Jesus say that He will re- 
ceive all that come to Him ? Is not this plain 
enough ? Is there anything discouraging in 
this ? Is not His word to be relied on as the 
word of truth ? But how can a person know 
that he is one of the elect? Might he not, 
after coming to the Saviour, find that, after all, 
he belonged to the non-elect ? That would not 
be possible. Such an objection refutes itself. 
The very fact that he comes to Christ, is itself 
a proof of his election ; for none but those 
whom the Father gave to the Son ever take such 
a step. 

Let us suppose a certain number of persons, 
say a thousand, say a million. To each of these 
million sinners there is the same promise, that if 
he will come to the Lord Jesus Christ he shall 
be saved. Is not this sufficient ? Can a reason- 
able creature ask for more ? What would a 
man really in earnest do ? What would an 
honest man do ? An honest man, a man 
really in earnest to secure his eternal well- 
being, would have no hesitation to act on such 
a promise at once. It is only cavilers that 
urge such objections, and if any one chooses to 



ARMINIAN LOGIC. 129 

play the fool by refusing to apply for pardon 
before he has ascertained whether he is one of 
God's elect, let him do so. I say again, an 
honest man finds no difficulty here. 

If a thousand estates, each worth a million of 
dollars, were set up as free gifts to paupers, on 
precisely the same conditions as the Saviour 
offers eternal life, there would in such a case be 
no caviling. An earnest, sober-minded man 
would reason thus : There may be, perhaps, a 
hundred times more beggars than estates ; but 
no matter, I will do my best, I will be only the 
more in earnest, I will labor only the harder to 
secure the prize to myself. A fault-finder, a reg- 
ular Arminian, on the other hand, might say : It 
would be folly in me to apply for an estate be- 
fore I have found out to a certainty that I am to 
have one. If I am to have one of these estates, 
I shall have one, do what I may ; if I am not to 
have one, I shall fail, do what I can ; so I will 
give myself no trouble about the matter. Sup- 
pose such a wiseacre should further argue : It is 
true, this splendid prize is offered to any pauper 
on condition that he will go and apply for it, 
but I will not go to make application for it, be- 
cause I do not want it. I will have nothing to 
do with it. But let it be distinctly understood, 
12* 



130 ABRAHAM LINCOLN. 

however, that if the donor does not make me 
willing to go, if he does not force me to accept, 
the whole blame of my poverty and wretched- 
ness must rest with him, not with me. What a 
beautiful illustration of Arminian reasoning ! 
But seriously, would any human being, unless 
devoid of common sense, ever act on such prin- 
ciples in the affairs of this life ? 

God has made Abraham Lincoln President of 
the United States. This event was just as cer- 
tain two years ago, a thousand years ago, eter- 
nal ages ago, as it is now. Two years ago there 
were four candidates for the Presidency. Did 
either of those distinguished men refuse to run 
because, forsooth, he could not certainly know 
beforehand that he would be elected ? Did you 
at that time hear any politician apply the prin- 
ciples of Arminianism to politics, and argue in 
some such way as this : " Gentlemen, if God 
has elected Mr. Lincoln, he will be our next 
President ; if He has elected Mr. Douglas, he 
will be President; or if He has chosen Mr. 
Breckenridge or Mr. Bell, why then one of these 
will be our Chief Magistrate. So you see, gen- 
tlemen, it is of no use to do anything. There 
is no need of any effort. You trouble your- 
selves for nothing. You cannot change the 



A TON OF GOLD. 131 

purpose of God. You ought therefore first to 
find out which of these candidates God has or- 
dained to fill the Presidential chair." 

There have been in our country, no doubt, 
some very wild, and a few very foolish politi- 
cians, but I am bold to say that no party has 
had advocates wild enough or foolish enough to 
employ such reasoning on any subject connected 
with politics, or on any other subject that in- 
volves the plain common sense of mankind. 
Religion forms an exception to this rule. It is 
only in religion that men can afford to be incon- 
sistent enough to be Arminians. 

John S:\iith. 



LETTER XXIV. 

Dear Brother : — 

If William B. Astor were to give public 
notice that, on such a day, he would put up 
in the City of New York a ton of gold as a 
prize, on this condition, that of ten thousand 
applicants, he should become the fortunate pos- 
sessor who begged the longest and the hardest, 
would not that day be set down as one of the 



132 A TON OF GOLD. 

most memorable in the annals of that great 
metropolis ? Neither the Japanese Embassy, 
nor the Great Eastern, nor the Prince of 
Wales, no, nor even Jefferson Davis, could 
draw such masses of people together. It 
would no doubt be a scene for a painter. 
Every avenue and street, every lane and 
alley, every nook and corner alive with the 
worshipers of Mammon; all pressing with 
eager steps to catch a glimpse of the wished- 
for treasure. Men and women, who turn up 
their noses at the wealth and honor Grod offers 
to bestow, and who would not give a straw for* 
all the possessions heaven itself contains, would 
now be found wide awake, closely calculating 
the chances of success, and resolved to try the 
utmost strength and capabilities of their lungs. 
But who could describe or even imagine the 
effect of ten thousand voices strained to accents 
long and loud, deep and shrill, begging, whin- 
ing, screeching, vociferating for gold ? A tithe 
of such earnestness and such effort in the righj; 
direction, would insure not only to one, but to 
all of them, a title to an inheritance enduring 
as the days of heaven. While I am writing 
this, the fancy by a natural association of ideas 
brings up the familiar* form of the Rev. Dr. R. 



AN ADDRESS BY DR. FOSTER. 133 

S. Foster, laboring with most praiseworthy 
energy and zeal to make a practical applica- 
tion of his celebrated Arminian arguments to 
the case now before him. " My good friends I" 
I think I hear the worthy doctor cry, " my 
good friends ! only one of you can get the prize. 
Nine thousand nine hundred and ninety-nine 
are making yourselves hoarse to no purpose. 
Since only one man can obtain the treasure, 
why do you not all go home and get about 
your business ? Whoever is to have this mass 
of gold will get it without fail, and if the rest 
of you were to clamor for it a thousand years it 
would do no good. If it is decreed that you 
are to be the favored one, it is all one whether 
you exert yourself or not. You are safe enough. 
You cannot possibly be set aside. The gold is 
yours because the Divine decree secures it to 
you. I say again, if it is so that God has de- 
creed that you shall have this treasure, it will 
be yours, whether you strive to obtain it or not. 
If, on the other hand, it is foreordained that 
you are not to have it, you may bawl away till 
your windpipe bursts and you will have your 
labor for your pains. What folly, then, to give 
yourselves any trouble about the matter ! Can 
you be simple enough to believe that you can 



134 RESULTS. 

change the purpose of God or frustrate His 
designs V " Doctor Foster," I think I hear 
these gentlemen say in reply, " we like your 
arguments extremely well when religion is the 
topic ; but gold not religion is just now the thing 
to be obtained, and we might be regarded as not 
quite in our right minds were we to act out your 
theory in the practical matter of fact before us. 
In the pulpit, this method of reasoning, we are 
glad to say, brother Foster, is capital. Em- 
ployed against the doctrine of election it is per- 
fectly irresistible. We cannot sufficiently ad- 
mire the wisdom and skill with which you have 
so often demonstrated to us, that if a man is 
elected to eternal life he need not repent, he 
need not believe in Christ, he need not live a 
holy life j he may lie, may cheat and rob, may 
commit adultery, may commit murder ; his salva- 
tion remains perfectly secure, and he cannot 
possibly be lost. We have also been delighted 
with the uncommon clearness and force of your 
logic, when you have undertaken to prove that 
if a person has not been elected to everlasting 
life, he may repent, he may trust in the Saviour, 
he may pray and weep and beg for the Divine 
favor ; he may renounce all his sins, be ever so 
penitent, have ever so strong a faith, and live 



ARGUMENTS GOOD FOR NOTHING. 135 

ever so holy a life, it is all in vain. There is 
no salvation for him, and do what he will he 
must be damned. We do love to hear you 
argue in this way, where the destiny of man 
and the interests of the future world are the 
subject of discourse. 

" But while in the pulpit this style of reason- 
ing is extremely forcible and perfectly convinc- 
ing, while it is most wonderfully calculated to 
overwhelm Calvinism, and to make Calvinists 
shrink away abashed and confounded, such 
arguments, the moment they are brought to 
bear on the ordinary business affairs of life, 
we must honestly tell you lose all their weight 
and point ; and to be plain, doctor, are abso- 
lutely good for nothing. So please excuse us, 
Dr. Foster, if we say again that we should be 
little better than fools were we in this matter to 
carry into practice your otherwise excellent 
theory." 

John Smith. 



138 TWO FACTS. 



LETTER XXY. 

Dear Brother : — 

There are two very important facts to which 
I now propose to call attention; afterward I 
will inquire into the reasons of the facts. The 
first fact, well known and disputed by nobody, is 
that all men do not come to Christ for salvation. 
Atheists, Deists, and Pantheists, as such, do 
not come. Mormons, Spiritualists, Universalists, 
Socinians, as such, do not come. Murderers, 
adulterers, thieves, drunkards, gamblers, blas- 
phemers, the covetous, the self-righteous, as 
such, in one word, the impenitent of every class 
and description, as such, do not come. To the 
question, " Lord, are there few that be saved?" 
the Lord replied, " Strive to enter in at the 
straight gate, for many, I say unto you, shall 
seek to enter in and shall not be able." The 
road to everlasting death was in the Saviour's 
time very wide, and the travelers on it exceed- 
ingly numerous. That fatal highway has not 
become less wide, while the gate that opens to 
eternal life is just as straight, and the way just 
as narrow as ever. So much for the first fact. 



TWO FACTS. 131 

The second fact, acknowledged alike by Ar- 
minians and Calvinists, is that a certain por- 
tion of mankind do come to the Lord Jesus to 
be saved. Many a weary sinner, oppressed 
with a sense of guilt, applied to Him in person 
during His sojourn on earth. Nor was such an 
application ever in vain. That voice, which in 
tones of awful rebuke, sent consternation to a 
generation of vipers and hypocrites, fell in ac- 
cents of heavenly tenderness on the ears of the 
broken in heart, and diffused a peace through 
the spirit that passed all understanding. Since 
the Redeemer's exaltation to the right hand of 
Power, vast multitudes have renounced the ser- 
vice of sin, have labored and suffered for His 
name's sake, and are now reigning with Him in 
glory. There are thousands and tens of thou- 
sands at present on the earth who have fled 
from the approaching storm to this dear Refuge, 
who are united by faith to the Lord Jesus, in 
whom Jesus lives, to whom Jesus is the power of 
God and the wisdom of God, and for whom the 
very name of Jesus has an inexpressible charm — a 

Dear Name, the Rock on which they build, 
Their Shield and Hiding-place : 

Their never-failing Treasury, filled 
With boundless stores of grace. 

So much for the second fact. 
13 



138 ENMITY OF THE HEART. 

Here, then, are two stupendous facts : a por- 
tion of mankind come to the Lord Jesus Christ, 
and are saved ; all the rest of mankind do not 
come, and are lost. How are we to account for 
these facts ? 

And, first, why do sinners reject the proffered 
aid of the only Being who can deliver them 
from everlasting destruction ? Why will they 
not come to the great Redeemer, who is the 
brightness of the Father's glory, and the ex- 
press image of the Father's Person, for pardon 
and for eternal life ? The Bible discloses the 
painful cause. A fixed, settled, deadly enmity to 
God, is the barrier and the only barrier in the 
way. Let this be removed, and the attractions 
of the cross would become absolutely irresisti- 
ble. But to the removal of this fatal barrier, 
the impenitent sinner, in whose estimation sin is 
happiness and holiness is misery, will by no 
means consent. Not heaven with its infinite 
joys, not hell with its infinite woes, can furnish 
motives strong enough to induce him to consent. 
Life itself is less dear to him than sin. You 
and we agree in maintaining that sinners refuse 
to come to the Saviour because they will not 
come, and that the reasons of their rejection of 
the offers of mercy all have their origin in the 



FINAL CAUSES. 139 

dreadful wickedness of their hearts. They love 
darkness rather than light ; that is, they love sin 
rather than holiness, rebellion rather than obedi- 
ence, Satan rather than God. The whole dif- 
ficulty begins and ends with themselves. They 
will not come that they may have life. So far 
there is no difference between us. 

But though we agree on this point, we are, 
unfortunately, not agreed on this other ques- 
tion ; while sinners in crowds reject the Saviour 
and are lost, why do other sinners come to Him 
to be saved ? With the reasons you assign we 
are not satisfied. It is not that they are false 
reasons ; as far as they go they are sound and 
good enough, but we charge that they do not 
go far enough. Men come to Christ, you say, 
because they experience the vanity of the world, 
because they taste the bitterness of sin, because 
they are attracted by the charms of the Saviour. 
All this is true. But here you stop. Yet the 
great Teacher does not stop here. These rea- 
sons He does indeed accept, but blends them 
harmoniously in this one grand ultimate reason, 
because the Father gave them to the Son. I know 
that you insist that it is by grace, and not of 
ourselves that we are saved, and I rejoice that 
you do insist on this ; but still, in your view of 



140 FINAL CAUSES. 

the matter, it ultimately depends not on God, 
but on the sinner, whether he is saved. The 
ultimate reasons of the sinner's coming to Christ 
you fix where you fix the ultimate reasons of 
the sinner's refusing to come to Christ, in the 
sinner himself. Now it is remarkable that Ar- 
minians, among the reasons they assign on this 
subject, never specify the grand reason given 
by the Saviour himself. In no Arminian book 
can it be found, from no Arminian pulpit is it 
proclaimed, that the Father gave the Son power 
over all flesh, that he, the Son, should give eter- 
nal life to as many as the Father had given 
Him, and that all that the Father gave to the 
Son shall come to Him. And yet the salvation 
of each and every Christian is traced to this as 
its ultimate source. To sum up the matter, the 
final reason of a sinner's salvation we fix in God. 
The final reason of a sinner's salvation you fix 
in the sinner himself. And this is a standing 
subject of difference between you and us. 

John Smith. 



THE NAMES IN THE CATALOGUE. 141 



LETTER XXYL 

Dear Brother : — 

You Arminians object to us that if only 
those are saved whom the Father has given to 
the Son, it is folly to offer salvation to sinners 
not elected to eternal life. This objection has its 
origin in the singular fallacy that the future con- 
dition of every person is always to be known by 
us. A Methodist preacher takes it for granted, 
if some were chosen in Christ before the founda- 
tion of the world, and others not chosen, that 
there must be some secret marks by which both 
parties can be recognized, and because nobody 
has ever discovered such secret marks, there- 
fore he draws the conclusion there are no elect. 
In both the Arminian and Calvinistic schemes, 
the same persons and precisely the same number 
of persons are saved. The number of sinners 
regenerated, sanctified, and glorified is just as 
large in our catalogue as in yours ; there is not 
a name in the one which is not found in the 
other. If, then, Calvinists ought to offer salva- 
tion only to those that shall be saved, that is to 
the elect, why ought not Arminians. to do so 
13* 



142 A SUPPOSITION. 

too ? But you will say that the number of the 
elect was not fixed by a decree from eternity. 
Suppose it was not ; suppose that the church 
was not elect according to the foreknowledge of 
God the Father ; suppose that believers were 
not chosen in Christ before the foundation of 
the world ; suppose that those whom the Father 
will glorify were not predestinated to be con- 
formed to the image of his Son ; decree or no 
decree, election or no election, there is not a 
single sinner more saved according to your 
scheme than according to our scheme, nor is 
there a single sinner more lost in our system 
than in yours. You know and believe as well 
as we that a definite number of the human race 
will be saved, and that in the end of the world 
just so many sinners, neither more or less, will 
be glorified in heaven ; why then do your 
preachers offer salvation to those who will 
never be saved ? Do you say, that had they 
closed in with the offer of mercy they too might 
have been saved ? So say we. Do you con- 
tend that it was their wicked unbelief and not 
a Divine decree that hindered them from coming 
to Christ ? That is also our doctrine. The Divine 
decree has, blessed be God, drawn many a poor 
forlorn sinner to the Saviour ; but it has never, 



ARMINIAN PERVERSIONS. 143 

never drawn away any sinner from the Saviour. 
The Rev. Dr. Foster, on the ninety-fifth page of 
his book, which Bishop Simpson regards as a 
work of great merit, asks these questions : " If 
Christ only died for a part of mankind, and if 
only a definite number may come to Him and 
be saved, I ask Dr. Rice, in the name of all 
reason and consistency, with what propriety can 
he invite persons not of the elect to come to 
Christ — to turn that they may have life, and to 
seek the favor of Grod ? Why does he make 
such invitations ? Is it not mockery, then, to 
ask them ? Are not all such invitations sheer 
trifling with interests the most awful and tre- 
mendous ?" Dr. Foster is evidently an earnest 
man, and for aught I know an honest man ; but 
it is difficult to comprehend how a judgment, 
naturally good, can be swayed by such reasons. 
His intense hatred of the doctrine of election 
only can account for this ; for I would not 
insult his understanding by supposing it to be 
possible that he could be persuaded to argue 
seriously in this way on any topic outside of 
Arminian theology. 

Of the four hundred souls on board of the 
Lady Elgin, now at the bottom of Lake Michi- 
gan, only ninety-two were preserved from death. 



144 THE REV. DR. FOSTER AGAIN. 

Let us suppose Dr. Foster to have been a pas- 
senger, and that an angel of the Lord had, on 
that eventful night, revealed to him that a defi- 
nite number, exactly ninety-two persons, would 
reach the shore alive, while all the rest would 
certainly perish. Soon after the fatal collision, 
the captain of the vessel rushes into the cabin, 
breaks open the bolted state-room doors, and in 
a voice of thunder cries out, " Rise ! men, rise ! 
the steamer is a wreck ; here are life preservers, 
take them, fasten yourselves to them, be of good 
courage, exert all your energies, and do your 
best to reach the land." "Captain," replies 
Dr. Foster, if we might imagine it within the 
compass of possibility that Dr. Foster should 
utter such Arminian absurdities on such an oc- 
casion, " captain, only ninety-two out of the 
four hundred passengers will be saved. Give 
your life-preservers only to those ninety-two ; 
tell only these to make use of them, encourage 
only these to be of good cheer, exhort only 
these to put forth all their efforts to escape de- 
struction. Since a definite number, just ninety- 
two, are to be preserved from a watery grave, 
I ask, captain, in the name of all reason and 
consistency, with what propriety can you invite 
persons not of the elect ninety-two to make use 



AN APPLICATION OF HIS LOGIC. 145 

of life-preservers, and exhort them to be of good 
courage, and to exert themselves to the utmost 
to secure their deliverance ? Is it not mockery 
to ask these three hundred and eight to do this ? 
Why do you make such invitations ? Are not 
all such invitations sheer trifling with interests 
the most awful and tremendous ?" 

"JN"ay, captain," continues the doctor, "I go 
further, and maintain that if you are one of the 
ninety-two, you need not give yourself any 
trouble about your situation, as there is no 
cause of alarm. You are safe enough ; you 
could not be drowned even if you were to sink 
to the bottom of the lake. If, on the other 
hand, you are not of this chosen number, all 
your efforts will be fruitless, and escape impos- 
sible. You may, therefore, as well retire to 
your state-room, fold your arms and quietly 
await the result. For my part, captain, I in- 
tend to sit still, and will neither lift a finger 
nor move a foot. I am an Arminian, and my 
practice shall not belie my sentiments. My 
doctrine is, that if I am one of the -elect ninety- 
two, I cannot be drowned ; if I am not one of 
this elect number, I cannot escape." 

John Smith. 



146 REV. JOHN WESLEY. 



LETTER XXYII. 

Dear Brother : — 

Ie I ask a Universalist whether he believes 
that the wicked will be punished in hell, cer- 
tainly be believes in hell and punishment, but it 
is a hell without fire, and punishment without 
wrath. If I ask an Arminian whether he holds 
to the doctrine of election, "Certainly," is the 
reply ; because it is impossible not to hold to 
some kind of election, since the Sacred Oracles 
are so explicit on this subject. The ground of 
election, according to the Scriptures, is to be 
sought in the sovereign will of God, who has 
mercy on whom He will have mercy. The 
ground of election, according to Arminianism, 
is to be sought not in the sovereign will of God, 
but in the self-determining will of man. It is 
not God that controls the choice of the sinner, 
it is the sinner that controls the choice of God. 
The Rev. John Wesley expresses his views on 
this subject thus : " God Preappointed obedient 
believers to salvation, not without, but accord- 
ing to His foreknowledge of all their works." 
That is, if Mr. Wesley is right, men were chosen 



'FORE APPOINTED TO SALVATION. 14 1 

to salvation not as lost sinners, but as already 
obedient believers. They, on their part, first 
willed to believe in Christ and to obey Him ; 
He, on His part, in consideration of such faith 
and obedience, Preappointed them to salvation. 
Mr. Wesley does indeed refer the salvation 
of sinners to grace. Far be it from me to say 
that he does not ; but we ought, he thinks, to 
be careful not to ascribe too much to grace. 
He is very severe on Calvinists for maintaining 
that election lies at the root of all genuine faith 
and obedience — the starting-point of each be- 
liever's salvation. He grants that Christians 
are elect, but it was their faith, their repentance, 
their love, their good works foreseen that in- 
fluenced the Divine choice. It was this that 
secured their election. God foresaw that they 
would exercise a sounder judgment than others, 
and that they would be disposed to do what was 
right by making a proper improvement of His 
grace. Since impartial justice requires, accord- 
ing to your scheme, that grace should be be- 
stowed on all men as sinners, and that all sin- 
ners should have an equal share, the wicked 
who perish in their sins are in possession of 
grace as well as the righteous, and their stock is 
just as large. The reason, then, that obedient 



148 CARS MOVE THE ENGINE. 

believers were foreappointed to salvation was 
not that God had a greater love for them, not 
that they received a larger measure of grace, not 
that they were the special objects of His favor. 
It was simply this. God foresaw that they would 
have a larger share of good sense, and would, 
in the exercise of their sober judgment, be in- 
clined to avail themselves of the salvation placed 
within their reach. While, therefore, we praise 
God in exalted strains for His goodness and 
mercy, Arminianism reminds us that we ought 
not, in the overflowing of our gratitude, to lose 
sight of the fact that at least a respectable 
amount of credit is due to ourselves. 

To draw this letter to a conclusion. In hu- 
man redemption the Bible represents election 
as the antecedent, or that which takes the lead, 
and holiness as the consequence, or that which 
follows. Election is the engine ; repentance, 
faith, love and obedience are the train. Ar- 
minianism reverses this. There repentance, faith, 
love, and obedience are the motive power, and 
election is the train. Thus, according to your 
way of thinking, it is not the engine that draws 
the cars, it is the cars that drive the engine. 

John Smith. 



ARMINIAN PREDESTINATION. 149 



LETTER XXYIIL 

Dear Brother : — 

I propose to-day to make a short discourse 
on a very fruitful theme, a theme which it is 
certainly not in my power to exhaust — the in- 
consistencies of the Arminian doctrine of elec- 
tion. The text is on the fifty-sixth page of 
the Doctrinal Tracts, the writer the Rev. John 
Wesley. " The sovereignty of God appears in 
disposing the time, place, and other outward 
circumstances — as parents, relations — attending 
the birth of every one." That so staunch an ad- 
vocate of Arminianism as the father of modern 
Methodism, should have given expression to 
sentiments so completely at variance with the 
principles of his own creed, is surely odd enough. 
Why, it may be asked, does God dispose the 
time, place, and other outward circumstances, 
such as parents and relations, attending the 
birth of those whom He foreknew would never 
be saved, whom, to quote Mr. Wesley's own 
language, He fo reappointed or predestinated as 
disobedient unbelievers to damnation, according 
14 



1^50 VOLTAIRE: 

to a foreknowledge of all their works from the 
foundation of the world ? 

Of all the bad men who lired in the last 
century, Yoltaire was without doubt one of the 
very worst. The poison of his malignant satire, 
after working death to three generations, is 
unhappily as active as ever. The guilt that 
burdened the soul of that bitter mocker was, 
one might think, almost too much for one sin- 
ner to bear. And yet from all eternity it was 
clearly foreseen what he would be, and what he 
would do. According to the Rev. Mr. Wesley, 
it was not a matter of chance that Yoltaire was 
born. The period in which he was born was 
not a matter of chance. The country in which 
he was born was not a matter of chance. The 
parents of whom he was born was not a matter 
of chance. All these things were providentially 
ordered and disposed, and in them the Divine 
sovereignty appears. Sentiments so just and 
orthodox we should hardly expect to find in a 
class of writers represented by Dr. Foster; but 
such was the teaching of John Wesley, and 
such, without doubt, is also the teaching of the 
Holy Scriptures. 

But since God disposes the time of every 
one's birth, why, it might be asked, was not 



Wesley's theory applied. 151 

Yoltaire brought into the world in the days of 
Sodom and Gomorrah, or in the times before 
the flood, when human wickedness had risen to 
such a pitch that he could have done no harm ? 
Or why was not this disastrous event put off 
until the millennial reign of Christ, when a 
scoffing infidel will be only an object- of pity or 
abhorrence ? 

Since God disposes the place of every man's 
birth, why was not Yoltaire born among the 
Esquimauxs or the Hottentots, in Patagonia or 
New Zealand, rather than in the heart of civil- 
ized and Christian Europe ? 

Since God disposes the circumstances of 
parentage, why were the parents of Yoltaire 
suffered to bring into the world the author of 
so much mischief and desolation ? Why was 
not the mother stricken with barrenness, or why 
did not a fit of apoplexy or a thunderbolt stay 
the birth ? Why was not the future apostle of 
skepticism and blasphemy snatched from the 
breast by a dysentery, by the measles, by the 
scarlet fever ? Would it not have been a thou- 
sand times better for his fellow-men ? Would it 
not have been a thousand times better for the 
poor man himself? Might he not now be a 
smiling cherub before the throne of that Sav- 



152 WESLEY'S THEORY APPLIED. 

iour whose name he execrated, and whose re- 
ligion he hated and opposed through a long 
and misspent life ? 

When questions like these are put to us, we 
have a ready answer, an answer prepared for 
us by the Lord Jesus himself: "Even so, Fa- 
ther, for -so it seemed good in Thy sight." 
Such a reply, however, it is well known, never 
satisfies Arminians. With them such a reason 
has so little force that it fails to relieve the dif- 
ficulty in their minds. They would rather ask, 
" Father, we desire to know why it thus seemed 
good in Thy sight ?" And yet they say that 
the sovereignty of God appears in disposing the 
time, place, and other outward circumstances, 
such as parents, relations, attending the birth 
of every one. And they further say. with Mr. 
Wesley, that all disobedient unbelievers were 
foreappointed or predestinated to damnation 
from the foundation of the world. Predesti- 
nated to damnation from the foundation of the 
world ! But, you will rejoin, they were fore- 
appointed to damnation because it was foreseen 
that they would refuse to believe and trust in 
Christ. The former you state as the fact, the 
latter as the reason of the fact. But no matter 
on what account, no matter for what reason, 



A RELIGION OF NOTHINGS. 153 

"disobedient believers were foreappointed or 
predestinated to damnation from the foundation 
of the world," the fact, the awful fact remains 
the same. Nor is this all. God, with a full 
knowledge of all their future ungodly deeds, and 
of their consequent future destiny, foreknowing 
that they would willfully reject the salvation of 
Christ, and would never be saved, disposed the 
time of their birth, the place of their birth, the 
outward circumstances of their birth. Here a 
very simple question and a very natural one 
arises. Why did Grod, foreseeing all these 
things, permit such persons to be born at all ? 
Do, brother, give an answer to this question, if 
you can ; I say, if you can. 

John Smith. 



LETTER XXIX. 

Dear Brother : — 

It is a very old trick, and one still in special 
favor among infidels, to raise all sorts of objec- 
tions against the Christian religion, while not a 
finger is moved to clear away the insuperable 
14* 



154 A RELIGION OP NOTHINGS. 

difficulties that beset their own wretched systems 
of disbelief. The religion of an infidel is in 
general a religion of nothings. Sin is nothing. 
Holiness is nothing. Heaven is nothing. Hell 
is nothing. Eternity is nothing. The Lord 
Jesus Christ is nothing. The Holy Spirit is 
nothing. Even God the Father is nothing. 
The foundation, if it may be so called, being 
laid in nothing, what can a man be expected to 
build on such a foundation ? Hence, to tear 
down, to break in pieces, to destroy the dearest 
hopes of his race, is the chosen and appropriate 
work of a skeptic. To lay a solid foundation, 
and to rear on it a well-proportioned and dura- 
ble edifice, is no part of such a man's mission. 

The Rev. Dr. Foster has, it is to be regretted, 
pursued a plan not unlike this in his Objections 
to Calvinism. He never brings forward argu- 
ments in proof of his own opinions. He seems 
to think that this is altogether unnecessary. 
He does not even condescend to tell us what his 
own opinions are. His business, one would sup- 
pose, is simply to caricature, to vilify, to assail 
the doctrines of the Calvinists. His readers 
very naturally inquire, what does Mr. Foster 
himself believe ? It is no hard task to under- 
stand what he does not believe. It is easy to 



NO GRACE NO RESPONSIBILITY. 155 

see that he does not believe that it was right to 
constitute Adam the federal head and repre- 
sentative of his posterity ; that he does not be- 
lieve that mankind might justly have been left 
to perish in their sins ; that he does not believe 
that sinners are answerable for their sins unless 
they first receive a measure of grace ; that he 
does not believe that God has a right to show 
mercy on whom He will show mercy, and to 
harden whom He will harden. It is easy enough 
to see what he does not believe, but it is by no 
means so easy to comprehend what he does 
believe. 

But, after all, Dr. Foster is not so much to 
blame. I mean no reproach, I am rather com- 
plimenting his shrewdness, when I say that he 
has very good reasons for not bringing out his 
own sentiments. Were I an Arminian, I might, 
perhaps, find it convenient to adopt a similar 
policy. I have sometimes for amusement, some- 
times for argument's sake, imagined myself a 
Methodist, and have wondered how I could, on 
Arminian principles, answer questions such as 
these : Why were those human beings permitted 
to come into the world, whom God foreknew 
from all eternity would never be saved, whom, 
as Mr. Wesley says, God foreappointed or pre- 



156 GRACE AN UNFORTUNATE GIFT. 

destinated to damnation in view of their wicked 
works ? Or why were they not cut off in tender 
infancy, and at once removed to heaven ? Since 
Arminianism teaches that there can be no re- 
sponsibility where there is no grace, why does 
God bestow grace on such as He knew would 
never improve this gift, on such as He knew 
would finally perish, on such as He knew could 
not, in fact, perish at all were it not for this 
most unfortunate blessing ? Of the impenitent 
sinner, Dr. Foster says: "He was born cor- 
rupt, and so could not be guilty for this; he 
could not — without grace — escape from corrup- 
tion, and so was not guilty for remaining in it." 
Why, then, is not every sinner, that God fore- 
knows will not become a Christian, left in this 
enviable state of innocent depravity ? Why are 
not all such sinners permitted to go on in such a 
blessed career of irresponsibility and corruption 
undisturbed and unmolested by grace ? Vol- 
taire, for example, was born corrupt, "and so 
could not be guilty for this; he could not of 
himself escape from corruption, and so was not 
guilty for remaining in it; and, according to 
the authority of the Rev. Dr. Foster, had it not 
been for grace, the great French blasphemer 
would have had no guilt whatsoever because of 



ARMINIAN DIFFICULTIES. 151 

his corruption. Why, then, was this gift, this 
most unhappy gift conferred on the poor man, 
since it was certain that grace would ruin him 
forever ? 

Or if this unfortunate blessing had to be be- 
stowed, if Yoltaire could not be permitted to 
pass through life in irresponsible depravity, did 
he receive as large a share of grace as he might 
have received ? Did God do all He could for 
him ? Could He do no more ? Was it out of 
the power of the Holy Ghost to convert him ? 
Could not that vain, self-sufficient, boasting, 
shallow free-thinker be brought to lick the dust, 
and in an agony of remorse to rend the very 
heavens with cries for mercy ? Have there not 
been other sinners as insolent and daring as he, 
as devoid of good principles, as black of heart, 
as ignorant of God, as fully bent on waging 
sacrilegious war against the dearest and holiest 
interests of the human family ? Was this mod- 
ern infidel a greater hater and a fiercer persecu- 
tor of the Lord Jesus than Saul of Tarsus ? 
Why did it not also please God to separate 
Yoltaire from his mother's womb, to call him 
by His grace, and to reveal His Son in him ? I 
say again, I have often wondered how, if I were 
an Arminian, I could, on Arminian principles, 



158 AN OLD TRICK. 

meet such questions as these. Were I actually 
a Methodist, I could not of course, any more 
than Dr. Foster, or any other Methodist, look 
such difficulties full in the face. I should most 
likely do as Dr. Foster does, not look at them 
at all. To meet such questions on scriptural 
ground, and without quibbling or shuffling to 
attempt a scriptural solution of them, is virtu- 
ally to give up all the peculiar characteristics 
of the Arminian system of theology. 

John Smith. 



LETTER XXX. 

Dear Brother: — 

It is an old trick with not a few of your 
brethren, to charge Calvinists with believing 
that men are not free agents because they be- 
lieve in the doctrine of election. There are 
thousands of simple-minded people who honestly 
think that we consider men as mere machines, 
and they think so because Arminian preachers 
and writers tell them so. . I know, indeed, that 
you would not stoop to such misrepresentations, 



AN INCIDENT. 159 

but your course is rather the exception than 
the rule. I shall never forget an incident that 
occurred in my travels through northern Penn- 
sylvania, in the summer of 1850. Late on a 
Saturday night, I put up at a public house, in a 
small village, to stay over the Lord's day. On 
inquiry, I found that there was but one church 
in the place, the Methodist Episcopal. At the 
hour appointed the next day for worship, I took 
my place among the congregation, a stranger to 
them all. As I am seldom taken for a minister 
where I am not known, I was pretty certain 
of remaining incognito on this occasion. My 
physiognomy, which you know is not the most 
prepossessing, drew on me the eyes of a number 
of persons in all parts of the house. They did 
not seem to know what to make of me. Some, 
as I afterward learned, suspected that I was a 
Jew, others set me down for a Frenchman or a 
German ; not one took me to be a minister of 
the Gospel. Nor would they ever have found 
out that people write Rev. before my name, 
had I not felt constrained afterward to make 
myself known. In a short time the preacher 
entered the pulpit, and after the usual genuflex- 
ion, commenced the services. I knelt with the 
congregation, and could inwardly say Amen to 



160 CALVINISM DEFUNCT. 

his genuine Calvinistic prayer. The text was 
taken from the last chapter in Revelation : "And 
the Spirit and the Bride say, Come." As I went 
to church for edification, and not to criticise, I 
listened with pleasure to some excellent remarks 
on the greatness of the Redeemer's salvation, 
and the freeness with which it is offered to sin- 
ners of every description. The uncouth gesticu- 
lation, the blundering style, the superfluous in- 
terjections were passed over in the contemplation 
of the surpassing richness of God's goodness in 
the gift of His dear Son. No man could deliver 
sounder doctrine, and but for the peroration I 
should have gone away from a scene of pleasure 
and profit. Unfortunately, the sermon was not 
complete in the estimation of the preacher with- 
out a running fight with Calvinism. "Calvin- 
ism," cried the speaker, looking me full in the 
face, and possibly associating my features with 
the features of the system he was about to an- 
nihilate, " Calvinism, my brethren, is dead and 
buried long ago. That horrible doctrine be- 
longed to the dark ages. It could not stand 
before the light of the nineteenth century. Yes, 
my brethren," — and here again, whether by ac- 
cident or to see what effect his oratory was 
producing on his new auditor, his eye fell full 



THE HOPE. 161 

upon me — "Calvinista are ashamed of their real 
sentiments. They believe that men are mere 
machines, not free agents."' The orator then 
proceeded to give ns an illustration of the de- 
funct Calvinistic belief. " Suppose there were 
a thousand poor wretches'' — I give you nearly 
his own language — ''-'in a deep pit full of water 
and mire, aud that God, for uo fault of theirs, 
had thrown them into this dreadful pit. Now, 
suppose further, that God had decreed to save a 
small number of those who are the elect, but to 
pass by the great majority, who are the non- 
elect. Well, He lets down a rope from heaven. 
That rope is to draw up only the elect. But 
some of the non-elect, nevertheless, mauage to 
get hold, and begin to cry aloud for mercy. 
But, no, they are told you are not elected ; you 
must stay and perish where you are. Xine 
hundred non-elect are rejected, notwithstand- 
ing the heart-rending cries of some of them for 
mercy. Presently the rope comes within reach 
of one of the elect. But the elect one has no 
desire to be taken up. and when urged to take 
hold, positively refuses. But he is one of the 
elect, and willing or not he must be saved, and 
so God throws the rope around him, tightens 
the coil, and pulls him up to heaven, the elect 
15 



162 PLEASANT SEQUEL. 

one resisting, kicking, and fighting most lustily 
all the while. This, brethren, illustrates the 
doctrines of the Calvinists. The elect are 
saved, do what they will ; the non-elect are 
damned, do what they can. Thank God, we 
do not believe that men are mere machines. 
We believe in free agency. We believe in free 
grace. Bless the Lord, brethren,"— and here 
I was favored with another searching gaze, — 
" Calvinism is dead and buried." I might stop 
here, as this is no unfair specimen of the out- 
rageous misrepresentations so often heard from 
Arminian pulpits, but as the sequel turned out 
pleasant enough, I may as well finish the story. 
When the discourse was ended, I arose slowly 
to my feet, and begged permission to make a 
few remarks. It was granted. " Your preach- 
er," I remarked, in a calm and pleasant tone of 
voice, which, in the breathless silence, was easily 
heard over the house, "your preacher- is a self- 
convicted resurrectionist. Calvinism is dead 
and buried long ago. Why could he not leave 
it decently buried ? Why must he disturb its 
last repose V Afterward, in a very serious, but 
conciliatory style, I took occasion to disabuse 
the minds of my fellow-hearers. I told them the 
plain truth about the matter, and they could not 



PLEASANT SEQUEL. 163 

but see, although I did not say so, that the illus- 
tration of the men in the pit was a most shameful, 
a most hideous caricature of the doctrine of the 
Calvinists. After I had concluded, the minister 
arose and made some remarks to the effect that it 
was to be regretted that Christians of different de- 
nominations should so often misunderstand each 
others' sentiments. " Brother," said he, direct- 
ing his address to me, " will you walk into the 
pulpit and pray for us ?" With pleasure the 
invitation was accepted. All that day and 
night, I was impressed with the singular scene 
through which I had passed. Early the next 
morning, my friend, the resurrectionist, made me 
a pleasant call at my lodgings, and, on taking 
leave, said, with an affectionate squeeze of the 
hand, "Brother Smith, the next time you pass 
through our village, do me the favor to make 
my house your home." 

John Smith. 



164 CAN GOD OR CAN HE NOT? 



LETTER XXXI. 

Dear Brother : — 

There has been for ages a dispute about the 
power of God ou one point. Can Jehovah or 
can He not so decree the acts of intelligent 
agents as to leave the agents perfectly free ? 
Does His omnipotence reach as far as this, or 
must it here succumb to an impossibility ? That 
is the question, and it is merely a question of 
power. We hesitate not a moment to take the 
affirmative, and boldly maintain that such a high 
and mysterious prerogative does of right belong 
to the Almighty ; while you hesitate not a mo- 
ment to take the negative, and just as boldly 
insist that such a high and mysterious preroga- 
tive does not of right belong to the Almighty. 
Here again we are at variance. Which of the 
two renders to God the highest meed of honor, 
Arminianism, which, with extreme jealousy, 
would circumscribe and limit the Divine power, 
or Calvinism, which rejoices to leave that power 
untrammeled and unlimited ? 

The Arminian theory assumes that if an act is 



ARMINIAN FIGURES. 165 

free, it could not be foreordained ; if an act was 
foreordained, it cannot be free. Omnipotence 
itself, you say, cannot reconcile foreordination 
with free agency. This is saying too much. 
On what do you found an assertion so bold, 
and, I must add, so irreverent ? Is it on the 
Scriptures ? But nowhere is the absolute power 
of God over the whole domain of mind set forth 
in terms so remarkable for energy and force, as 
we find it in the teachings of the Bible. Is it 
on reason ? To us, indeed, the decrees of God 
may appear incompatible with human freedom, 
but it is only because the link which connects 
the two lies buried in depths which it is not 
given to men to fathom. Surely, brother, you 
will not pretend to have sounded the unknown 
depths of pure reason. 

I have often observed with pain that the mo- 
ment predestination or the Divine decrees are 
so much as named, the Arminian imagination 
seems to become alive with all sorts of fantastic 
images ; men turned into senseless blocks, men 
turned into machines, men pinioned and fettered 
and manacled, men forced against their will to 
commit sin, and then, poor creatures, cast into 
hell, to be punished for crimes which they were 
by an irresistible decree absolutely compelled to 
15* 



166 WHAT IS PREDESTINATION? 

commit ; and under the influence of imagery so 
whimsical and capricious, the Arminian bile is 
stirred to its utmost depths. 

What is predestination ? You define it in 
one way, we define it in another way. You say 
that it is a decree which robs a person of his 
freedom, and converts him into an irresponsible 
machine. Predestination in this sense of the 
term you reject with abhorrence. I am happy 
to inform you that predestination, with such a 
meaning attached to it, we reject with an abhor- 
rence just as great. We hold that human beings 
are free moral agents, not necessitated moral 
machines. What then is predestination ? We 
affirm that it is a decree of God which will cer- 
tainly be fulfilled, but which at the same time 
leaves the agent perfectly free, that is, just as 
free as if there were no Divine decree. This, 
you say, you cannot understand. You are 
right; you cannot. Nor can we. This is not 
the only subject you cannot comprehend. God 
had no beginning. Can you grasp the stupen- 
dous thought ? You cannot. Do you on that 
account reject the eternity of God ? But you 
insist that predestination involves a contradic- 
tion. You might with the same show of reason 
affirm that the eternity of God involves a con- 



COMPARISON. 16 7 

tradiction. Both these subjects are incompre- 
hensible mysteries, but an incomprehensible 
mystery does by no means necessarily imply in- 
consistency with itself. The Apostle Paul de- 
clares that we are predestinated according to 
the purpose of Him who worketh all things 
after the counsel of His own will. Now if pre- 
destination involved a real contradiction, such 
language an inspired writer would not have em- 
ployed. We may lay it down as an incontro- 
vertible proposition that it is absolutely impos- 
sible that such a Being as God should exercise 
a prerogative which contradicts and. stultifies 
itself. 

An error into which it is very easy and very 
natural to fall, lies at the bottom of all our dif- 
ficulties in this matter. It is an altogether 
mistaken conception of God's nature. The 
operations of the Divine mind we are prone to 
regard as quite similar to what we experience 
in ourselves, and the Divine mind we seem to 
take for granted is only, so to speak, a human 
mind invigorated and magnified into colossal 
greatness. We seem to take it for granted that 
Jehovah must think and act as we do ; whereas 
He can no more think and act as we do, than 
we can think and act as He does. It is well to 



168 CONTRAST. 

take heed to what He himself teaches us on this 
subject. " My thoughts are not your thoughts, 
and my ways are not your ways." The plans 
and purposes of mortals, while they cannot run 
into the past, penetrate but a little way into the 
future. The horizon which bounds the area of 
human effort is rarely out of sight, and beyond 
that horizon are no illimitable oceans, no bound- 
less expanse, no immeasurable heights, no un- 
fathomable depths. The plans and purposes of 
Jehovah, on the other hand, are the product of 
a mind with which all the past and all the future, 
the eternity which has swept over the universe, 
and the awful eternity which is yet to come, is 
as distinctly, as vividly present as this passing 
moment. There are points of resemblance in 
the modes of thinking between the lowest in the 
human scale and the highest in that scale, be- 
tween an Australian savage and a Newton or a 
Webster. There are points of resemblance, we 
may safely assume, between the race of man and 
the race next above man, and the race above 
that race, and so on, up through all the grada- 
tions of the mighty scale, till we reach the 
highest development of created intellect. But 
vast as is the distance between the mental endow- 
ments of the lowest savage, and the mental en- 



GOD INCOMPREHENSIBLE. 169 

dowments of one of heaven's most exalted sons, 
it is not immeasurable. A molehill, which you 
can cover with the sole of your foot, is a very 
insignificant object, and Chimborazo, thrusting 
its snow-capped cliffs far beyond the region of 
the clouds, is a very sublime object. But the 
one may still be compared with the other. 
Were that molehill to shrink to the diminutive- 
ness of a single atom of dust, and were that 
mountain to shoot its lofty peaks up to the orb 
of the moon, there would still be figures to ex- 
press the enormous disparity. And vast as is 
the interval between the weakest human creat- 
ure and the mightiest angel, between him that 
is but a few removes from the beasts that 
perish, and him that enjoys the illustrious dis- 
tinction of standing in the presence of God, the 
interval partakes of the finite, and it can be 
spanned. But when we attempt to ascend from 
the creature to the Creator, all comparison is 
ended. Here we are dumb. Here it well be- 
comes us to be dumb. And it is here that the 
voice of the Infinite Majesty is heard out of the 
invisible glory to command : " Be still and know 
that I am God. Be done, ye worms of the dust, 
with your foolish comparisons and foolish rea- 
sonings. Presume not to judge me by your- 



1T0 GOD INCOMPREHENSIBLE. 

selves. My judgments are depths, where your 
feeble powers are utterly bewildered and con- 
founded. My ways your weak understandings 
cannot possibly comprehend. They are now, 
and I mean that they shall forever be, past find- 
ing out. To my creatures I render no account 
of my acts. I condescend to no explanation of 
the reasons for doing what I do. The hearts of 
all men are in my hand, and I turn them as the 
rivers of water are turned. I make peace and 
I make war. I make light. and create darkness. 
The wrath and wickedness of man I make to 
praise me, the remainder I restrain. I do ac- 
cording to all my pleasure not only among the 
obedient armies of heaven, but also among the 
rebellious children of men. I chose my people, 
in Christ my Son, before the foundation of the 
world, predestinating them to the adoption of 
children according to the good pleasure of my 
will. I have mercy on whom I will have mercy, 
and I harden whom I will harden. Let no one 
presume to demand of me, then, why I find fault, 
on the audacious plea that men, in fulfilling my 
decrees, are not resisting my will. Let the race 
of Adam understand that I am the Lord, and 
that though I give no account of my ways, 
though my thoughts are not and cannot be 



DR. FOSTER'S OBJECTIONS. Ill 

their thoughts, and my ways are not their ways, 
justice and righteousness are ever the habitation 
of my throne." 

Let us now, in conclusion, Jisten and hear 
what the Rev. Dr. Foster has to say to all this. 
"And, first," says the doctor, " I object, it 
renders the conclusion inevitable that God is 
the Author of sin. I object to the doctrine of 
decrees, because it destroys the accountability 
of man. I object further, if this doctrine be 
true, at the final judgment the conscience and 
intelligence of the universe will and must be on 
the side of the condemned. Heaven and hell 
would equally revolt at it, and all rational 
beings would conspire to execrate the Almighty 
Monster capable of such a procedure. Hell 
would be a refuge from such a Being !" This 
is plain, straightforward, outspoken Arminian- 
ism, set forth by a plain, straightforward, out- 
spoken man. 

John Smith. 



172 THE HARDENING OF PHARAOH'S HEART. 



LETTER XXXII. 

Dear Brother: — 

" God hardened Pharaoh's heart." " Pharaoh's 
heart was hardened." "Pharaoh hardened his 
heart." Moses, writing by inspiration, employs 
these three expressions, and it evidently makes 
no difference to him which one he employs in the 
sacred narrative. The first ascribes the harden- 
ing to God. The third ascribes it to Pharaoh. 
The second ascribes it either to Pharaoh or to 
God. Now how is this to be accounted for? 
Had the inspired penman been an Arminian, 
would the obnoxious sentiment, God hardened 
Pharaoh's heart, be found in the book of Genesis 
or in any other book in the Bible ? I think not. 
How could an honest Arminian write such a 
sentence ? The whole difficulty in the case is 
easily solved if we can only make up our minds 
to trust the infinite wisdom and the infinite power 
of Jehovah. God determined to harden Pha- 
raoh's heart, and Pharaoh's heart was hardened. 
How this was done is not explained, and it is 
clearly not given to us to know. We, ought, 



RIGHT, SO FAR AS GOD WAS CONCERNED. IT 3 

therefore, to be willing to leave the mystery just 
where we find it, unsolved and unsolvable. 

The hardening of the Egyptian monarch's 
heart was in one important sense God's act, and 
in another important sense Pharaoh's act. The 
act, so far as God was concerned, was perfectly 
right ; the act, so far as Pharaoh was concerned, 
involved enormous guilt. 

It involved enormous guilt because it was 
Pharaoh's own act. He, like every other human 
being, was a free agent. He chose his part. 
He refused to obey. He resisted the divine 
mandates. He set up the standard of open re- 
bellion. He defied the Omnipotent. He was 
brought to condign punishment. Had he not 
been guilty in the true and genuine sense of the 
term, he would not have been set up as a monu- 
ment to all generations at once of the amazing 
patience and of the fierce wrath of Almighty 
God. 

The act, so far as it related to God, was per- 
fectly right. Right, not only because He is ac- 
countable to none and can do what He pleases, 
but because it was right in itself. All the world 
acknowledges the right in God to do things, 
which, if done by us, would justly be stigma- 
tized as fearful crimes. He blasts men's hopes, 
16 



IT 4 WRONG, SO FAR AS 

cuts off their crops, destroys their goods, af- 
flicts their households, burns up their dwellings, 
strikes down their children, sends war and pes- 
tilence and famine, with all their dreadful train 
of woes, and nobody presumes to call in ques- 
tion the Divine goodness or justice. Nor, as 
I said, is it right merely because He has the 
power to do all these things unhindered. It is 
a right which everybody feels and acknowledges 
belongs to Him. So in the matter before us. 
He did what no creature could have done with- 
out deep guilt. He hardened Pharaoh's heart. 
Although it is impossible to say how this was 
done, it was so done as not in any way to impair 
the freedom of that man's actions, Not only 
before the divine tribunal, but before the tribu- 
nal of the world and before the tribunal of his 
own conscience, Pharaoh, King of Egypt, stood 
condemned. 

But if the principles laid down by the teach- 
ers of Arminian theology be sound, Pharaoh, 
King of Egypt, was a much injured man. Not 
only did he not do wrong, in the premises ; it was 
impossible that he should do wrong, for how 
could he be to blame if God hardened his heart ? 
To blame for what? For having a hardened 
heart ? But was it not Grod that hardened his 



PHARAOH WAS CONCERNED. H5 

heart ? "And the Lord commanded Moses and 
Aaron to go in to the King of Egypt and de- 
mand that he should let the children of Israel 
go." "But I will harden his heart so that he will 
not let the people go." The demand was made ; 
it was rejected. "And God hardened the heart 
of Pharaoh so that he would not hearken to 
them." "Accomplished what his Maker wished 
him to do." — I am quoting the very language of 
the Rev. Dr. Foster — "what it was not only 
impossible he should avoid, but what if he had 
avoided would have been a breach of his Maker's 
will, a damnable sin." It is true Dr. Foster is 
not here speaking particularly of Pharaoh, but 
of any and every instance where a person fulfills 
the Divine purpose; so that as a matter of 
course Pharaoh's case is comprehended in the 
general rule. "It is to no purpose," continues 
the author of Objections to Calvinism, "that I 
am told that Grod decrees events, yet so as there- 
by violence is not offered to the will of the crea- 
ture, because this strikes my mind only in the 
light of a contradiction." "Am I accountable," 
he asks with indignant warmth, " for doing what 
by decree I am compelled to do ? Or is the 
Author of the decree responsible ?" In other 
words, was the King of Egypt, tyrant, oppressor, 



176 A SCRIPTURAL PRAYER. 

persecutor, defiant rebel, accountable for his 
daring wickedness and hardness of heart, or 
was Jehovah himself, decreeing the hardness of 
heart, responsible ? To Dr. Foster's mind it is 
perfectly manifest that the Divine decree takes 
away all moral qualities from human actions. 
Indeed, so clear is this matter, that he does not 
see how it can escape any one's observation. 
The good doctor is even afraid that his readers 
might blame him for attempting any proof of 
this ; all that he has to do is to assert that it is 
so. That is, it is perfectly clear to Mr. Foster's 
mind that the whole guilt of hardening the heart 
is to be ascribed not to Pharaoh to whom it 
could not of right belong, but to God himself 
to whom it must of right belong. 

John Smith. 



LETTER XXXIII. 

Dear Brother: — 

In the fourth chapter of the Acts of the Apos- 
tles we find this statement: For of a truth, 
against Thy holy child Jesus were gathered to- 
gether Herod and Pontius Pilate, with the Gen- 



A SCRIPTURAL PRAYER. If? 

tiles and the people of Israel, to do whatsoever 
Thy hand and counsel determined before (liter- 
ally, predestinated) to be done. The death of 
Christ was thus foreordained. The circum- 
stances attending His death were foreordained. 
It was foreordained who should be the agents 
that were to compass His death. Let us pause 
a moment and see with what wonderful clearness 
these things are set forth. It is not Herod and 
Pontius Pilate, with the Gentiles and Jews, were 
gathered together to do what Thou foresawest 
that they would do at any rate ; it is not Herod 
and Pontius Pilate, with the Gentiles and Jews, 
were gathered together to do what Thou didst 
not hinder them from doing, what Thou didst 
merely permit them to do. No ; but Herod and 
Pontius Pilate, with the Gentiles and the Jews, 
were gathered together to do whatsoever, that 
is everything that, Thy hand and counsel deter- 
mined before to be done. In the fullness of time, 
not an hour sooner nor an hour later, the Saviour 
was born. And in due time, not an hour too 
soon nor an hour too late, the momentous catas- 
trophe with which was connected the destiny of 
untold myriads took place. Christ died for the 
ungodly. On more than one occasion His 
watchful enemies had lain in wait to take His 
16* 



178 DR. FOSTER'S PRINCIPLES APPLIED. 

life. But in vain, for His hour was not yet come. 
At length His hour, that eventful hour predes- 
tined from eternity, was come, and with it came 
also the actors in that wonderful scene. The 
first act was the betrayal; then came in quick 
succession the arrest, the mock trial, the sen- 
tence of death, the scourging, the crucifixion ; 
the actors, Judas Iscariot, Herod the Tetrarch, 
Pontius Pilate the Governor, the Roman soldiers, 
and a multitude of the people of Israel. 

The fertile imagination of the Rev. Dr. Fos- 
ter has more than once indulged itself in his 
book, by representing angels and men as sitting 
in judgment and passing a unanimous sentence 
of condemnation on the decrees of God. Now 
let us for a few moments suppose it within the 
range of things possible, that the common Ar- 
minian sneers and flings at foreordination and 
predestination could really find utterance in the 
solemn day of final account. Herod with con- 
fidence in his looks might rise and say in that 
august presence : " Lord, Thy hand and counsel 
determined before that I should set in array, and 
with my men of war mock Thy Son. Was I to 
blame for this? Did I commit a wrong in 
fulfilling Thy purpose ? Was it in my power to 
frustrate Thy designs ?" 



DR. FOSTER'S PRINCIPLES APPLIED, 179 

Pontius Pilate might with equal confidence 
defend his course, and say: "It is true I ar- 
raigned, tried, and condemned Thy dear Son; 
but didst Thou not thyself decree that I should 
do this ? Or didst Thou not at least decree that 
this should be done ? Did I do more, did I do 
less than that which Thy hand and counsel de- 
termined before to be done ? Must not Thy 
wise purposes and plans always be carried out ? 
Would it not have been a sin had I attempted 
to do otherwise ?" 

The Roman Gentiles might boldly put in 
their plea in a style not unlike the following : 
" We took Jesus and scourged Him, we platted 
a crown of thorns and put it on His head, we 
smote Him on the face with the palms of our 
hands, we spat on Him, we pierced His hands 
and His feet, we parted His raiment and cast 
lots on His vesture. All these things we did. 
We cannot deny it. We do not wish to deny 
it. We rather claim a reward for doing Thy 
will. Were not the Scriptures to be fulfilled ? 
Did we not do what Thy counsel determined be- 
fore should be done? Was it not absolutely 
necessary that Christ should suffer all these 
things ? Did not He himself say that thus it 
must be ? Could it then be otherwise ? If the 



180 DR. FOSTER'S PRINCIPLES APPLIED. 

Scriptures must be fulfilled, if Thy purposes 
must be accomplished, are we in any sense to 
blame ? Do we not rather merit the highest 
praise and the most substantial rewards for 
doing whatsoever Thy hand and counsel deter- 
mined before to be done ?" 

The people of Israel, with Judas Iscariot at 
their head, might also on their part take courage 
and set up this formidable Arminian plea: 
Christ was betrayed into the hands of sinners, 
but was it not expressly written that thus it 
should be done? Could I help it? Judas 
might ask. Was it not so determined ? Am I 
accountable for doing what by decree had to be 
done ? If Christ had not been betrayed, would 
not Thy counsels have been frustrated ? And 
would it not be a sin to frustrate Thy purpose ? 
The high priest might take up a similar line of 
defense. It is true I insulted the majesty of Thy 
Son, I refused to give Him an impartial hearing, 
I did all that was in my power to bring Him into 
trouble, and foolishly and without a shadow of 
right fastened on Him the charge of blasphemy. 
But, Lord, was not this in accordance with Thine 
own decree ? Didst Thou not design that it 
should be so ? Does it not stand recorded in 
Thy word that we who were engaged in this 



DR. FOSTER'S PRINCIPLES APPLIED. 181 

transaction were all gathered together to do 
whatsoever Thy hand and counsel determined 
before to be done? Now we would ask, could 
Thy counsel be set aside ? And must we be 
damned for doing the very things which Thou 
didst decree should be done ? 

The chief priests and scribes and rulers of the 
Jews, firm in the Arminian opposition to the 
Divine predestination, might here interpose : 
" We, the people of Israel, were resolved, right 
or wrong, let come what would, to secure the 
conviction and the condemnation of Christ. 
But we do not in any sense regard ourselves as 
culpable, because we only did that which had 
to be done, that which Thy holy word expressly 
said Thy counsel determined before should be 
done. Without an atonement there would have 
been no salvation. Had not Christ died there 
could have been no atonement. Is it then not 
manifest that we merit, not condemnation, but 
the highest praise for bringing about such a glo- 
rious result ? Were not we and the Gentiles 
and Herod and Pontius Pilate severally by our 
acts accomplishing Thy holy will ? Suppose we 
had not been gathered together to do whatso- 
ever Thy hand and counsel determined before to 
be done, what would have become of Thy coun- 



182 DR. FOSTER'S PRINCIPLES APPLIED. 

sel and purpose ? What would have become of 
the prophecies which foretold these things ? 
What would have become of the lost race of 
Adam ? What would have become of Abraham 
and Isaac and Jacob and all the prophets and 
holy men of old who had already been accepted 
and received into heaven because Christ was to 
die for their sins V 

Let us plead with Thee, O Lord, would it be 
consistent with righteousness and justice to find 
fault with Thy creatures for doing Thy will? 
Couldst Thou find it in Thine infinitely holy na- 
ture to condemn us for doing what Thou knowest 
Thy hand and counsel determined before to be 
done ? Thou couldst not, we know that Thou 
couldst not, all heaven knows that Thou couldst 
not. But should it be otherwise, shouldst Thou 
really hold us responsible and pass sentence of 
condemnation on us for doing the acts, the very 
acts which were before determined and foreordain- 
ed, we hesitate not to declare that we should feel 
constrained by a sense of justice to ourselves, 
openly and boldly to enter our solemn protest 
and to take an appeal from Thy tribunal to the 
intelligence and conscience of the universe ! 

Now you will perceive, my dear brother, that 
this is exactly in the style and manner of the 



DR. FOSTER'S PRINCIPLES APPLIED. 183 

E,ev. Dr. Foster. His book can furnish whole 
pages of argument just as striking and just as 
cogent, and I may add, just as sound as these, 
and his book, you will remember, is indorsed by 
the highest authority in your church, the Rev. 
Bishop M. Simpson and the present accom- 
plished editor of the Methodist Quarterly Re- 
view. But do you not see, my brother, that the 
Arminian theory applied to scriptural examples 
not only falters but completely breaks down ? 
Undoubtedly the Divine decrees were, according 
to the eternal purpose which was purposed in 
Christ Jesus, in every minute particular carried 
out and fulfilled. But did this exculpate the mis- 
creants who had joined in a league to shed in- 
nocent blood ? Did this diminish the guilt of 
their persistent malice and rage ? Does the 
Bible take the part of Judas and Herod and 
Pilate ? Does it take sides with the hypocritical 
Jews and hardened Romans ? Does it excuse 
or palliate the bitter mockery, the howls of ven- 
geance, the buffetings, the crown of thorns, the 
spikes and the cross ? Do the Scriptures in- 
sinuate that there is unrighteousness with God ? 
Do the Scriptures talk of appealing from the 
tribunal of the Judge of all the earth to the 

conscience of the universe ? 

John Smith. 



184 AN ARMINIAN PRAYER 



LETTER XXXIY. 

Dear Brother : — 

The other evening, in the company of a few 
select friends, I proposed for our instruction 
that we should each undertake to turn the 
leading sentiments of Arminianism into the 
language of prayer. We made the attempt and 
found it to be a failure. It could not be done. 
I have often heard a good prayer offered by 
Arminians, but never an Arminian prayer. A 
Methodist invariably borrows the sentiments of 
his Calvinistic brethren when he comes to the 
throne of the heavenly grace. He seems to 
know as if by instinct that his own are not 
suitable. In truth, Arminianism cannot be 
worked up into prayer. It would crumble to 
pieces in the very attempt. It is only as you 
temper it with the great truths of Calvinism 
that it can be made up into anything like 
prayer proper to be offered to the Divine Ma- 
jesty. On your knees, you Arminians are all 
very good Calvinists, and as long as you remain 
on your knees you do virtually indorse the 



UTTERLY IMPRACTICABLE. 185 

principles and doctrines of the Westminster 
Confession of Faith. But, with strange incon- 
sistency, the moment you rise to your feet you 
are all Arminians again. If it could be so con- 
trived that all the pious Methodists in Europe 
and America should for just one whole day pre- 
serve the attitude of devotion, then for just one 
whole day would all the pious Methodists in 
Europe and America be good and sound Cal- 
vinists. What a blessed spectacle, brother, this 
would be ! 

We have thus decidedly the advantage of 
you. Our prayers and our sermons are of the 
same material. We can convert the sentiments 
of our sermons into the language of prayer; 
we can take our prayers and turn them into 
sermons. This you Methodist preachers can- 
not do. 

Try, if you have the heart to do it, to address 
Almighty God in the language of your senti- 
ments. In what follows I solemnly protest I 
mean no irreverence, it is only Arminianism 
spoken, not to men, but to God. " Lord, Thou 
canst not have mercy on whom Thou wilt have 
mercy. This would make Thee partial. Thou 
canst not harden whom Thou wilt harden. 
This would make Thee unjust. Thou canst not 
IT 



186 AN ARMINIAN PRAYER 

control and guide the free acts of Thy crea- 
tures. This would make them machines and 
Thee often the author of sin. All are not 
glorified whom Thou didst justify, since some 
who have been justified fall from grace and are 
finally lost. All are not justified whom Thou 
didst call, for many are called who refuse to 
come. Moreover, whom Thou didst call Thou 
didst not predestinate. None are predestinated. 
Thou art not strictly bound to bestow grace on 
fallen sinners; but, Lord, it is certain that if 
Thou didst not bestow grace, sinners would not 
be accountable for their deeds. If Thou 
shouldst withhold grace from any man, of that 
man Thou couldst not require repentance and 
faith, and shouldst Thou undertake to bring 
such a person to punishment, the conscience of 
the universe would be against Thee and on the 
side of the condemned. Thou couldst not in 
righteousness permit men to come into the 
world with such natures as they have, hadst 
Thou not made compensation for the wrong in- 
flicted on the human family. Thou didst make 
ample compensation in the gift of Thy dear 
Son, and no man can now justly find fault with 
the arrangement whereby we are born with na- 
tures depraved and corrupt." 



UTTERLY IMPRACTICABLE. 187 

This is Arminianism of the purest kind, but 
I am confident in the assertion, that no Ar- 
minian, alive or dead, in any of the four quar- 
ters of the globe, has ever ventured in any 
tongue spoken by man to address God in such 
a style. 

Between the Methodists and Roman Catholics 
there is indeed a wide distance. It is the gulf 
between Protestantism and Popery, between 
mental freedom and mental bondage. On one 
point, however, they are not so far apart. 
They are both given to praying in a foreign 
tongue — the one literally, the other metaphori- 
cally. The Romanist delivers a discourse in 
English, French, or G-erman, as the case may be, 
and says his prayers in Latin. The Methodist 
preaches the doctrines of Arminius and prays 
in the language of Calvinism. Neither the one 
nor the other is ever known to pray publicly in 
his own proper tongue; the Papist will not, the 
Arminian cannot. Brother, if I belonged to 
a denomination which could not pray- in the 
language of its own sentiments ; if every time I 
was about to enter into my closet or into my pul- 
pit I had to leave my own creed outside the door 
and had to borrow my neighbor's creed for the 
purposes of devotion, I say if I belonged to a 



188 ARMINIAN PRAYER IMPRACTICABLE. 

sect that lived thus on borrowed capital, I think 
that I should dissolve my ecclesiastical relations 
on short notice, and cast in my lot with those who 
can preach as they pray and can pray as they 
preach. 

John Smith. 



the END. 



■% 



< 




£33" 



Deacidified using the Bookkeeper process. 
Neutralizing agent: Magnesium Oxide 
Treatment Date: May 2006 

PreservationTechnologies 

A WORLD LEADER IN PAPER PRESERVATION 

1 1 1 Thomson Park Drive 
Cranberry Township, PA 16066 
(724)779-2111 



